DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2025; the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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, 2, 3, 9, 11, 13, 14, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-124164397-B2 to Kainulainene et al., from hereon Kainulainene in view of R1-2402939, "Discussion on specification support for AI/ML-based beam management", 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #116-bis, Changsha, China, April 15th – April 19th , 2024, 22 pages from hereon MediaTek.
Regarding claim 1 Kainulainene teaches…a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) comprising: a transceiver; and a processor configured to: receive, via the transceiver, configuration information (claim 10 discloses… A wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the WTRU comprising: a processor, memory, and a transceiver which are configured to: receive information indicating a first radio bearer path configuration for a signaling radio bearer (SRB) associated with control plane data and a second radio bearer path configuration for a data radio bearer (DRB) associated with user plane data, receive information indicating one or more measurement configurations for one or more measurement objects associated with the SRB, transmit measurement data, as control plane data, associated with the one or more measurement objects ), and send, via the transceiver, a report (Col. 21, Lns. 21-40, Col. 26, Lns. 1-8) but does not teach…wherein the configuration information comprises: an indication of a first set of beams; an indication of a second set of beams, wherein the second set of beams is a subset of the first set of beams; an indication of a set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; and an indication of one or more beam quality thresholds; determine a measured beam quality associated with at least one beam of the second set of beams based on measurements performed on the set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; determine, for at least one future time instance, a predicted beam quality associated with at least one beam of the first set of beams based on the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams; and send, via the transceiver, a report, wherein content of the report is based on the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams for the at least one future time instance and the received one or more beam quality thresholds.
Mediatek teaches… wherein the configuration information comprises: an indication of a first set of beams; an indication of a second set of beams, wherein the second set of beams is a subset of the first set of beams; an indication of a set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams (introduction discloses…Beam management - DL Tx beam prediction for both UE-sided model and NW-sided model, encompassing [RAN1/RAN2]: Spatial-domain DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case1”) Temporal DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on the historic measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case2”) Specify necessary signalling/mechanism(s) to facilitate LCM operations specific to the Beam Management use cases…section 2.1.1.1 further discloses... Fig. 1 and 2, Figure 2 presents two examples of report configuration when Set B RS resources are configured as periodic RS resources, which is shown in green arrows. These examples assume that the observation window includes three time instances of Set B transmission and the prediction window includes two time instances. Once the periodic Set B RS resources are configured, UE can keep measuring the L1-RSRP for Set B. To enable a periodic NW-side model inference for beam management, NW can configure a periodic report, as Figure 2(a) shows. In Figure 2(a), the orange dash lines show the time when each periodic report is reported, which can be configured by the periodicity and offset of the report configuration. NW can configure the offset of the report so that the measurement can be reported between the last Set B RS resources transmitted for measurement and the first time instance of prediction, i.e. T1, for the current model inference instance. Since Set B is periodic, UE can determine how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting from the periodicity and offset of the report ); and an indication of one or more beam quality thresholds (section 2.3.2.2 discloses… performance monitoring of a UE-side model, UE can report an event to NW based on the monitored performance metric(s). How UE can detect such event can be facilitated by the second agreement. To study the mechanism to facilitate UE to detect such event, the definition of an event should be aligned between NW and UE first. For example, an event can be one monitoring instance of missed beam prediction, a certain number of consecutive instances of missed beam prediction, or an observation that the beam prediction accuracy is less than a threshold after a sequence of monitoring instances. Meanwhile, the event can also be when the RSRP prediction error is larger than a threshold from one or more monitoring instances. It is also important to define how frequently that UE can collect the monitoring samples and how many number of monitoring samples is required for model monitoring.. ); determine a measured beam quality associated with at least one beam of the second set of beams based on measurements performed on the set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; determine, for at least one future time instance, a predicted beam quality associated with at least one beam of the first set of beams based on the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams; and send, via the transceiver, a report, wherein content of the report is based on the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams for the at least one future time instance and the received one or more beam quality thresholds (Section 2.3.2.2, proposal 23 discloses… For BM-Case1 and BM-Case2 with a UE-side AI/ML model, regarding performance monitoring, study potential spec impact(s) from the following aspects in addition to those included in previous agreements: • Configuration/Signalling from gNB to UE for measurement and/or reporting • UE calculates performance metric(s), either reports it to NW or reports an event to NW based on the performance metric(s) o FFS: definition of an event and the performance metric(s) used to identify it …Agreement For BM-Case1 and BM-Case2 with a UE-side AI/ML model, regarding performance monitoring, study the necessity and potential spec impact(s) of the mechanism that facilitate UE to detect whether the functionality/model is suitable or no longer suitable; Fig. 1 and 2, Figure 2 presents two examples of report configuration when Set B RS resources are configured as periodic RS resources. the observation window includes three time instances of Set B transmission and the prediction window includes two time instances. Once the periodic Set B RS resources are configured, UE can keep measuring the L1-RSRP for Set B. To enable a periodic NW-side model inference for beam management, NW can configure a periodic report. NW can configure the offset of the report so that the measurement can be reported between the last Set B RS resources transmitted for measurement and the first time instance of prediction, i.e. T1, for the current model inference instance. Since Set B is periodic, UE can determine how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting from the periodicity and offset of the report, as well as the periodicity of Set B in the observation window and prediction time instances in the prediction window. Alternatively, NW can configure the value of how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting in the report configuration too.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene by incorporating the teachings of MediaTek because the method and device allow for various modes of support for facilitating AI/ML-based beam management, including further discussion on the configuration of Set B for model inference, and details on how to support more than 4 beam reporting in L1-signaling.where… At first, NW configures Set B RS resources for UE to measure at multiple time instances. UE then collects and transits all the Set B measurement to NW, where NW performs model inference to the predict best beam(s) for one or multiple future time slots. For BM Case2, the time instances for Set B measurement constitute the observation window. On the other hand, if Set B < Set A (MediaTek, intro and section 2). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 2 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, MediaTek teaches…wherein the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams is associated with a first time instance and the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams is associated a future time instance the is subsequent in time to the first time instance (secton 2.1.1. discloses… NW can also configure aperiodic reports to facilitate NW-side model inference for beam management, as Figure 2(b) shows. In Figure 2(b), the aperiodic report is triggered whenever NW requires the Set B measurements for model inference. Once triggered, UE will report the Set B measurements of all the latest time instances that span an observation window to NW. Therefore, NW and UE need to align with each other how many time instances need to be reported as measurements for model input.).
Regarding claim 3 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, MediaTek teaches…wherein the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams comprises at least one of reference signal received power (RSRP), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), or noise power, and wherein the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams comprises at least one of reference signal received power (RSRP), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), or noise power (Introduction…agreement 2).
Regarding claim 9 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, MediaTek teaches…wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of a selected beam associated with each future time instance, wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds (section 3.2.2.2 discloses… each with different performance metrics, threshold, required number of samples, and monitoring frequency, configured for UE to monitor and report.).
Regarding claim 11 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, MediaTek teaches…wherein the content of the report comprises: for a first future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of a selected beam of the first set of beams and an indication of the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam; and for each future time instance other than the first future instance, an indication of a difference between the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam for the first future time instance and the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam associated with each respective other future time instance (section 2.3 Performance monitoring, alt 1-4).
Regarding claim 13. Kainulainene teaches..a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the method comprising(claim 10 discloses… A wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the WTRU comprising: a processor, memory, and a transceiver which are configured to: receive information indicating a first radio bearer path configuration for a signaling radio bearer (SRB) associated with control plane data and a second radio bearer path configuration for a data radio bearer (DRB) associated with user plane data, receive information indicating one or more measurement configurations for one or more measurement objects associated with the SRB, transmit measurement data, as control plane data, associated with the one or more measurement objects ): and sending a report (Col. 21, Lns. 21-40, Col. 26, Lns. 1-8); but does not teach…receiving configuration information, wherein the configuration information comprises: an indication of a first set of beams; an indication of a second set of beams, wherein the second set of beams is a subset of the first set of beams; an indication of a set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; and an indication of one or more beam quality thresholds; determining a measured beam quality associated with at least one beam of the second set of beams based on measurements performed on the set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; determining, for at least one future time instance, a predicted beam quality associated with at least one beam of the first set of beams based on the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams; and sending a report, wherein content of the report is based on the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams for the at least one future time instance and the received one or more beam quality thresholds.
MediaTek teaches… receiving configuration information, wherein the configuration information comprises: an indication of a first set of beams; an indication of a second set of beams, wherein the second set of beams is a subset of the first set of beams; an indication of a set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; and an indication of one or more beam quality thresholds(introduction discloses…Beam management - DL Tx beam prediction for both UE-sided model and NW-sided model, encompassing [RAN1/RAN2]: Spatial-domain DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case1”) Temporal DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on the historic measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case2”) Specify necessary signalling/mechanism(s) to facilitate LCM operations specific to the Beam Management use cases…section 2.1.1.1 further discloses... Fig. 1 and 2, Figure 2 presents two examples of report configuration when Set B RS resources are configured as periodic RS resources, which is shown in green arrows. These examples assume that the observation window includes three time instances of Set B transmission and the prediction window includes two time instances. Once the periodic Set B RS resources are configured, UE can keep measuring the L1-RSRP for Set B. To enable a periodic NW-side model inference for beam management, NW can configure a periodic report, as Figure 2(a) shows. In Figure 2(a), the orange dash lines show the time when each periodic report is reported, which can be configured by the periodicity and offset of the report configuration. NW can configure the offset of the report so that the measurement can be reported between the last Set B RS resources transmitted for measurement and the first time instance of prediction, i.e. T1, for the current model inference instance. Since Set B is periodic, UE can determine how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting from the periodicity and offset of the report ); determining a measured beam quality associated with at least one beam of the second set of beams based on measurements performed on the set of RS resources associated with the second set of beams; determining, for at least one future time instance, a predicted beam quality associated with at least one beam of the first set of beams based on the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams; and sending a report, wherein content of the report is based on the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams for the at least one future time instance and the received one or more beam quality thresholds(Section 2.3.2.2, proposal 23 discloses… For BM-Case1 and BM-Case2 with a UE-side AI/ML model, regarding performance monitoring, study potential spec impact(s) from the following aspects in addition to those included in previous agreements: • Configuration/Signalling from gNB to UE for measurement and/or reporting • UE calculates performance metric(s), either reports it to NW or reports an event to NW based on the performance metric(s) o FFS: definition of an event and the performance metric(s) used to identify it …Agreement For BM-Case1 and BM-Case2 with a UE-side AI/ML model, regarding performance monitoring, study the necessity and potential spec impact(s) of the mechanism that facilitate UE to detect whether the functionality/model is suitable or no longer suitable; Fig. 1 and 2, Figure 2 presents two examples of report configuration when Set B RS resources are configured as periodic RS resources. the observation window includes three time instances of Set B transmission and the prediction window includes two time instances. Once the periodic Set B RS resources are configured, UE can keep measuring the L1-RSRP for Set B. To enable a periodic NW-side model inference for beam management, NW can configure a periodic report. NW can configure the offset of the report so that the measurement can be reported between the last Set B RS resources transmitted for measurement and the first time instance of prediction, i.e. T1, for the current model inference instance. Since Set B is periodic, UE can determine how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting from the periodicity and offset of the report, as well as the periodicity of Set B in the observation window and prediction time instances in the prediction window. Alternatively, NW can configure the value of how many periods of Set B measurement are required for reporting in the report configuration too.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene by incorporating the teachings of MediaTek because the method and device allow for various modes of support for facilitating AI/ML-based beam management, including further discussion on the configuration of Set B for model inference, and details on how to support more than 4 beam reporting in L1-signaling.where… At first, NW configures Set B RS resources for UE to measure at multiple time instances. UE then collects and transits all the Set B measurement to NW, where NW performs model inference to the predict best beam(s) for one or multiple future time slots. For BM Case2, the time instances for Set B measurement constitute the observation window. On the other hand, if Set B < Set A (MediaTek, intro and section 2). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 14 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the method of claim 13,MediaTek teaches… wherein the measured beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the second set of beams is associated with a first time instance and the predicted beam quality associated with the at least one beam of the first set of beams is associated a future time instance the is subsequent in time to the first time instance(secton 2.1.1. discloses… NW can also configure aperiodic reports to facilitate NW-side model inference for beam management, as Figure 2(b) shows. In Figure 2(b), the aperiodic report is triggered whenever NW requires the Set B measurements for model inference. Once triggered, UE will report the Set B measurements of all the latest time instances that span an observation window to NW. Therefore, NW and UE need to align with each other how many time instances need to be reported as measurements for model input.).
Regarding claim 18 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the method of claim 13, MediaTek teaches…wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of a selected beam associated with each future time instance, wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds (section 3.2.2.2 discloses… each with different performance metrics, threshold, required number of samples, and monitoring frequency, configured for UE to monitor and report.).
Regarding claim 19 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the method of claim 13, MediaTek teaches…wherein the content of the report comprises: for a first future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of a selected beam of the first set of beams and an indication of the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam; and for each future time instance other than the first future instance, an indication of a difference between the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam for the first future time instance and the predicted beam quality associated with the selected beam associated with each respective other future time instance (Section 2.3.1 and (section 2.3 Performance monitoring, alt 1-4 ).
Claim(s) 6, 7, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-124164397-B2 to Kainulainene et al., from hereon Kainulainene andR1-2402939, "Discussion on specification support for AI/ML-based beam management", 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #116-bis, Changsha, China, April 15th – April 19th , 2024, 22 pages from hereon MediaTek in view of R1-2405428, "FL summary #1 for AI/ML in beam management", 3GPP TSG RAN WG1#117, Fukuoka City, Fukuoka, Japan, May 20th – 24th , 2024, 137 pages from hereon MediaTek-428.
Regarding claim 6 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, but do not teach…wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams are indicated in order of beam quality associated with the selected beams, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds.
MediaTek-428 teaches… wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams are indicated in order of beam quality associated with the selected beams, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds (Alt1-4 discloses…the beam prediction ranking/ordering the ranking/ordering of the best beams derived from model output and the ranking of the best beams derived from measurement; Vivo (9) further discloses…support for beam index type resource indicator where beams reported with highest quality to lowest).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene and MediaTek by incorporating the teachings of MediaTek-428 because the method and device allow for various modes of support for facilitating AI/ML-based beam management, including Beam management - DL Tx beam prediction for both UE-sided model and NW-sided model, encompassing: Spatial-domain DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case1”), Temporal DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on the historic measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case2”), Specify necessary signalling/mechanism(s) to facilitate LCM operations specific to the Beam Management, Enabling method(s) to ensure consistency between training and inference regarding NW-side additional conditions (if identified) for inference at UE (MediaTek-428, intro and section 2). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 7 Kainulainene, MediaTek, and MediaTek-428 teach the WTRU of claim 6, MediaTek-428 teaches… wherein the content of the report further comprises an indication of the predicted beam quality associated with each selected beam of the first set of beams (report for inference, Huawei/HiSi, opt1 where indicated beam in the bitmap reuse the mechanism to . support for beam index type resource indicator where beams reported with highest quality to lowest).
Regarding claim 8 Kainulainene, MediaTek, Mediatek-428 teach the WTRU of claim 6, MediaTek-428 teaches…wherein the report comprises a bitmap for identifying an association between each future time instance and each selected beams of the first set of beams(report for inference, Huawei/HiSi, opt1 where indicated beam in the bitmap reuse the mechanism).
Regarding claim 15 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the method of claim 13, but do not teach…wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams associated with each future time instance are indicated for each future time instance in a sequence of future time instances, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds.
MediaTek-428 teaches… wherein the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams associated with each future time instance are indicated for each future time instance in a sequence of future time instances, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds thresholds (Alt1-4 discloses…the beam prediction ranking/ordering the ranking/ordering of the best beams derived from model output and the ranking of the best beams derived from measurement; Vivo (9) further discloses…support for beam index type resource indicator where beams reported with highest quality to lowest).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene and MediaTek by incorporating the teachings of MediaTek-428 because the method and device allow for various modes of support for facilitating AI/ML-based beam management, including Beam management - DL Tx beam prediction for both UE-sided model and NW-sided model, encompassing: Spatial-domain DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case1”), Temporal DL Tx beam prediction for Set A of beams based on the historic measurement results of Set B of beams (“BM-Case2”), Specify necessary signalling/mechanism(s) to facilitate LCM operations specific to the Beam Management, Enabling method(s) to ensure consistency between training and inference regarding NW-side additional conditions (if identified) for inference at UE (MediaTek-428, intro and section 2). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claim(s) 10, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-124164397-B2 to Kainulainene et al., from hereon Kainulainene andR1-2402939, "Discussion on specification support for AI/ML-based beam management", 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #116-bis, Changsha, China, April 15th – April 19th , 2024, 22 pages from hereon MediaTek in view of US-20230353226-A1 to Bai et al., from hereon Bai.
Regarding claim 10 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 9, but do not teach…wherein the content of the report further comprises an indication of the predicted beam quality associated with each selected beam.
Bai teaches… wherein the content of the report further comprises an indication of the predicted beam quality associated with each selected beam (claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene and MediaTek by incorporating the teachings of Bai because the method and device allow for various modes of support the determination of a set of values respectively corresponding to a set of value received from a device that corresponds to a set of beams and determine a predicted value which corresponds to beams (Bai, Abs). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 12 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the WTRU of claim 1, but do not teach…wherein the content of the report comprises: an indication of a first beam of the first set of beams; and for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams.
Bai teaches… wherein the content of the report comprises: an indication of a first beam of the first set of beams; and for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams(claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene and MediaTek by incorporating the teachings of Bai because the method and device allow for various modes of support the determination of a set of values respectively corresponding to a set of value received from a device that corresponds to a set of beams and determine a predicted value which corresponds to beams (Bai, Abs). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 20 Kainulainene and MediaTek teach the method of claim 13, but do not teach…wherein the content of the report comprises: an indication of a first beam of the first set of beams; and for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams.
Bai teaches… wherein the content of the report comprises: an indication of a first beam of the first set of beams; and for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams(claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kainulainene and MediaTek by incorporating the teachings of Bai because the method and device allow for various modes of support the determination of a set of values respectively corresponding to a set of value received from a device that corresponds to a set of beams and determine a predicted value which corresponds to beams (Bai, Abs). The motivation is that by applying a well-known standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the main reason for objection of the claims under discussion is the inclusion of “the content of the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams associated with each future time instance are indicated for each future time instance in a sequence of future time instances, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds.” and “the report comprises, for each future time instance of the at least one future time instance, an indication of selected beams of the first set of beams, wherein the selected beams are indicated in order of beam quality associated with the selected beams, and wherein the selected beams are selected based on the predicted beam quality associated with each beam of the first set of beams and the one or more beam quality thresholds.” as the prior art of record in stand-alone form nor in combination read the disclosed claims as supported by the specification. Furthermore, the nearest prior art such as US-20230060540-A1 to Zander, US-20230053589-A1 to Peseshki, WO-2025155223-A1 to Li .
Claims 5 and 17 are allowed as they depend from an objected claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO form PTO-892: . WO-2024138708-A1 to Li, WO-2025234124-A1 to Echigo, and US-20230060540-A1 to Zander .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS SAMARA whose telephone number is (408)918-7582. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6-3 PT.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/L.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2476
/PHIRIN SAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights