CTNF 18/833,009 CTNF 83071 DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to Application No. 18/833,009 filed on 7/25/2024. The preliminary amendment presented on 7/25/2024, which amends claims 1-2 and 4-8 and cancels claims 9-10, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-8 and 11-12 have been examined. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 7/25/2024 and 9/16/2025 is being considered by the examiner. Specification The specification is objected to because: 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4, 7-8, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (hereinafter Kumagai)(US 2020/0099421) in view of Venugopal et al. (hereinafter Venugopal)(US 2020/0022000) . Regarding claims 1 and 11-12, Kumagai teaches as follows: A wireless communication apparatus (interpreted as the base station 2 in figure 2) comprising: at least one memory (interpreted as the storage device 14 in figure 2) storing instructions (the storage device 14 is a device that stores various pieces of information, see, ¶ [0023] and figure 2), and at least one processor (processor 16 in figure 2) configured to execute the instructions to; acquire measurement results of reception quality of a plurality of beams received by a plurality of wireless devices from each of the plurality of wireless devices (the receiver 26 obtains a reception state of each beam of each terminal 3, from CSI feedback signals from U number of terminals 3. Here, the reception state of each beam is an L1-reference signal received power (RSRP), a channel quality indicator (CQI) or the like which is measured by using the reference signal, see, ¶ [0028] and figure 3); calculate degrees of similarity in the reception quality between the plurality of wireless devices based on the measurement results (the list generator 41 determines a beam number of a beam with an RSRP having the highest reception quality among RSRPs of beams of each terminal 3, as the optimum beam number . For example, an RSRP value of the beam #B of the terminal 3 #U is expressed as an RSRP B,U . In addition, for the convenience of explanation, it is assumed that the list generator 41 uses the L1-RSRP in the latest CSI feedback signal of each terminal 3, see, ¶ [0031]); and select a combination of wireless devices to be spatially multiplexed from among the plurality of wireless devices based on the degrees of similarity (the grouping unit 42 refers to the list 50, and groups the terminals 3 of which optimum beams have the same beam number into the same group . For example, a group #B is a group of the terminals 3 of which optimum beams have, for example, the beam number #B. Referring to the list 50 illustrated in FIG. 4, for example, since the optimum beams of the terminals 3 #a and 3 #e have the optimum beam number “#1,” the terminals 3 #a and 3 #e are grouped into the same group #1 with the same optimum beam, see, ¶ [0034] and figure 4)(the user data generator 22 generates a data signal for each selected terminal 3. The multiplexer 23 spatially multiplexes the reference signal and the data signal of each terminal 3 with different times or frequency resources, see, ¶ [0026]). Kumagai teaches grouping wireless devices with same optimum beam number having the highest reception quality. Kumagai does not explicitly teach calculating degrees of similarity in the reception quality. Venugopal teaches as follows: The beam measurement reports may include one more identifiers of which metric, threshold, parameter, and/or algorithm to use, such as corresponding to the measured RSRP correlation metrics (equivalent to applicant’s reception quality), spatial correlation metrics, and/or AoA separation or correlation of the one or more beams 325. The UE 104 may perform measurements on each received beam 325 based on base station-defined metric, threshold, parameter, and/or algorithm and provide a beam measurement report in the UE beam diversity response 335 to the base station 102 via the measurement reporting component 470… Based on the measurement reports , the base station may group the one or more beams 325 into one or more TCI states in order to ensure robustness of each scheduled UE 104 in the coverage area 110 of the base station 102. In some aspects, beams with “similar” characteristics (e.g., similar AoA, RSRP correlation, and/or spatial-correlation) may be grouped together into the same TCI state (see, ¶ [0067] and figures 3-4). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumagai with Venugopal to include grouping beams with similar RSRP correlation together as taught by Venugopal in order to ensure robustness of each scheduled UE. Regarding claim 2, Kumagai teaches as follows: Transmit a reference signal to the plurality of wireless devices using the plurality of beams (the first RF unit 31 is a transmitter that is provided for each antenna element 12 of each beam, converts the reference signal and the data signal into a wireless signal, and transmits the wireless signal to each terminal 3 via the antenna element 12 corresponding to the predetermined beam, see, ¶ [0026] and figure 3); and acquire the reception quality of the reference signal as the reception quality (the receiver 26 obtains a reception state of each beam of each terminal 3 , from CSI feedback signals from U number of terminals 3 (equivalent to applicant’s plurality of wireless devices). Here, the reception state of each beam is an L1-reference signal received power (RSRP) , a channel quality indicator (CQI) or the like which is measured by using the reference signal , see, ¶ [0028] and figure 3). Regarding claim 3, Kumagai teaches as follows: Wherein the reception quality is at least any one of reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), and a signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR)(the reception state of each beam is an L1-reference signal received power (RSRP) , a channel quality indicator (CQI) or the like which is measured by using the reference signal, see, ¶ [0028] and figure 3). Regarding claim 4, Kumagai in view of Venugopal teaches similar limitations as presented above and Kumagai further teaches the predetermined number as follows: The terminal selector 44 in the scheduling unit 27 designates the selectable number of terminals 3 for performing the MU-MIMO (operation S12). In addition, the selectable number of terminals 3 for performing the MU-MIMO is a maximum number K of terminals 3 for performing the MU-MIMO (see, ¶ [0037] and figure 5A). Therefore, it is rejected for similar reason as presented above. Regarding claims 7-8, Kumagai does not teach setting a threshold for selecting. Venugopal teaches as follows: The base station 102 may configure the RSRP-correlation threshold and provide the RSRP-correlation threshold information to the UE 104. Accordingly, the UE may report beam indices of one or more beams 325 that satisfy the RSRP-correlation threshold (e.g., report beams whose correlation is below the RSRP-correlation threshold)(see, ¶ [0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumagai with Venugopal to include setting RSRP-correlation threshold as taught by Venugopal in order to efficiently set a required quality . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (hereinafter Kumagai)(US 2020/0099421) in view of Venugopal et al. (hereinafter Venugopal)(US 2020/0022000), and further in view of Umeno et al. (hereinafter Umeno)(US 2020/0233106) . Regarding claim 5, Kumagai in view of Venugopal teaches all limitations as presented above except for the well-known inner products to calculate similarity between two vectors. Umeno teaches as follows: The degree of similarity of the signals can be calculated, for example, by an inner product of unit vectors based on the phases (observation data) of the signals received by the central observation station 2a and the respective observation stations 2, and in a case where the inner product is less than a predetermined value, it may be determined that the signals are not similar (different)(see, ¶ [0140]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumagai in view of Venugopal with Umeno to include the well-known inner product of vectors as taught by Umeno in order to calculate the degree of similarity. Regarding claim 6, Kumagai in view of Venugopal and Umeno does not explicitly teach of substituting a predetermined value. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumagai in view of Venugopal and Umeno to include substituting a predetermined (default) value for data not collected in order to efficiently compensate the missing data. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET. 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, Glenton B Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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. /JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454 May 30, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 2 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 3 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 4 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 5 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 6 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 7 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 8 Art Unit: 2454 Application/Control Number: 18/833,009 Page 9 Art Unit: 2454
Prosecution Insights