Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jeon et al. (US 2022/0104233 A1), hereinafter Jeon.
Regarding claim 1, Jeon discloses the network configures multiple CSI processes and corresponding CSI-RS resource configuration with corresponding subcarrier/timing offset. As an example, each configuration may correspond to transmission of CSI-RS from different TRPs, cells, or beams experiencing different frequency offset values. The UE may or may not know which set of cell(s)/TRP(s)/beam(s) are involved in the transmission of CSI-RS. At operation 902, the network indicates the UE via, e.g., RRC or DCI, on which CSI process is to be measured and reported at a given instance. At operation 903, the network transmits CSI-RS of a certain CSI process at the given instance with corresponding resource configuration and subcarrier offset and receives the measurement report from the UE, see 0138.
Regarding claim 2, multiple timing adjustments or frequency offsets that each at least partially compensate for Doppler shift (e.g., due to distance of a satellite transmitter or relative speed of a terrestrial receiver) of a signal, physical channel, or resource during wireless transmission are configured. The characteristics compensated comprise one of resource element (RE) mapping, channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) configuration, bandwidth part (BWP) configuration, or control resource set (CORESET) configuration. Information indicating the multiple configurations is transmitted from a base station (BS) to at least one user equipment (UE). The timing adjustments or frequency offsets are specifically configured for one UE, a group of UEs, or the UEs served by a single serving cell. Joint transmission from multiple cells/TRPs/spotbeams may involve partial/full subcarrier alignment, see 0006. The one or more of the signals, channels, or resources may correspond to one of a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS), a tracking reference signal (TRS), a demodulation reference signal (DMRS), a sounding reference signal (SRS), or another reference signal. In case that the one or more of the signals, channels, or resources corresponds to the CSI-RS, the UE may be configured with one or multiple CSI processes with a corresponding CSI-RS resource configuration including a timing adjustment or frequency offset value, and the UE may be periodically or aperiodically triggered to measure the CSI-RS with an indicated configuration and to transmit a CSI measurement report, see 0012.
Regarding claim 11, this claim has similar limitations as those of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected under Jeon for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1. The UE 300-fig.3 includes processing circuitry 310 that couples with communication interface 320 via bus system 305.
Regarding claim 12, multiple timing adjustments or frequency offsets that each at least partially compensate for Doppler shift (e.g., due to distance of a satellite transmitter or relative speed of a terrestrial receiver) of a signal, physical channel, or resource during wireless transmission are configured. The characteristics compensated comprise one of resource element (RE) mapping, channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) configuration, bandwidth part (BWP) configuration, or control resource set (CORESET) configuration. Information indicating the multiple configurations is transmitted from a base station (BS) to at least one user equipment (UE). The timing adjustments or frequency offsets are specifically configured for one UE, a group of UEs, or the UEs served by a single serving cell. Joint transmission from multiple cells/TRPs/spotbeams may involve partial/full subcarrier alignment, see 0006. The one or more of the signals, channels, or resources may correspond to one of a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS), a tracking reference signal (TRS), a demodulation reference signal (DMRS), a sounding reference signal (SRS), or another reference signal. In case that the one or more of the signals, channels, or resources corresponds to the CSI-RS, the UE may be configured with one or multiple CSI processes with a corresponding CSI-RS resource configuration including a timing adjustment or frequency offset value, and the UE may be periodically or aperiodically triggered to measure the CSI-RS with an indicated configuration and to transmit a CSI measurement report, see 0012.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 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.
5. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
6. 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.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
8. Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon as applied to claim 1, in view of Lee et al. (US 2022/0271802 A1), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 18, Jeon discloses all claimed limitations, except calibrate the first TRP or the second TRP. It is noted that the BS 200-fig.2 includes memory 290 that stores non-transitory computer-readable media having instructions that are to be executed to perform the claimed steps.
Lee from the same field of endeavor as Jeon teaches in one embodiment III, the NW performs a calibration process among TRPs with network layer signaling through front-/mid-/back-haul interface such as, e.g., F1/Xn/Ng interface. FIG. 14 illustrates a network for calibration between TRPs to exemplify a scenario considered in this disclosure, where a calibration management function (CMF) and its associated TRPs can exchange calibration management messages through front-/mid-/back-haul interface and perform over-the-air RS transmissions for calibration between antenna panels (active antenna units) of the TRPs, see 0198.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to employ a calibration process from a network to its associated TRPs taught by Lee into the system of Jeon. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide a mechanism on calibration necessity detection and reporting, where an UE is configured to measure RSs transmitted from multiple TRPs for distributed MIMO systems.
Regarding claim 19, Jeon discloses the UE may be configured with one or multiple CSI processes with a corresponding CSI-RS resource configuration including a timing adjustment or frequency offset value, and the UE may be periodically or aperiodically triggered to measure the CSI-RS with an indicated configuration and to transmit a CSI measurement report, see 0011-0012.
Allowable subject matter
9. Claims 3-10, 12-17 and 20 are rejected based on its dependency, would be allowable if rewritten or amended to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Abdelghaffar et al. (US 2023/0179260 A1); Kim et al. (US 2024/0333370 A1) are cited, and considered pertinent to the instant specification.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUC C HO whose telephone number is (571)272-3147. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-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, Gary Mui can be reached on 571-270-1420 (Gary.mui@uspto.gov). The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DUC C HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights