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 Objections
Claim 22-24 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 22 recites in line 4 “the second check data”, and in line 6 “the first check data”. There is not antecedent basis for “the second check data” and “the first check data”.
Claim 23 recites in line 2 “the first check data”, and in line 3 “the second check data”. There is not antecedent basis for “the first check data” and “the second check data”.
Claim 24 recites in the last line “acquiring the first check channel information”. There is no antecedent basis for “the first check channel information”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1,3, 13, 16 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
TIMO discloses “A method for feeding back channel state information (See [0001] methods for proprietary ML-based CSI reporting), “comprising: acquiring first check channel information” (See Fig. 7, action 701 [0185] the first node 601 obtains the channel data from the second node 602, or the third node 603 comprising the channel data base 603-1); “determining first check channel state information according to the first check channel information” (See [0171] The first node 601 may have access to one or more trained NN-based AE-encoder models for encoding the CSI. See Fig. 7, [0186] In action 702 the first node 601 computes, with the AE-encoder 601-1, encoder output data based on channel data e.g., training channel data); “and feeding back the first check channel state information” (See Fig. 7, [0187] In action 703 the first node 601 provides AE-encoder data to the second node 602 comprising the NN-based AE-decoder 602-1. The AE-encoder data includes the encoder output data computed with the AE-encoder 601-1. [0189] The format of the provided AE-encoder data may match a format of a CSI report comprising AE-encoded CSI).
Regarding claim 3,
TIMO discloses “The method for feeding back channel state information according to claim 1, wherein acquiring the first check channel information comprises: determining the first check channel information according to first check data and first channel information” (See [0186] the first node 601 computes, with the AE-encoder 601-1, encoder output data based on channel data e.g., training channel data, representing the communications channel 123-DL between the first communications node 121 and the second communications node 111. The channel data is preferably real field data that accurately represents live, in-network, conditions. The channel data may also comprise features of the channel, such as DFT basis vectors).
Thus, the channel data input to the AE encoder, corresponding to first check channel information, comprises training channel data, corresponding to first check data, and channel features such as DFT basis vectors, corresponding to first channel information.
Regarding claim 13,
TIMO discloses “The method for feeding back channel state information according to claim 1, wherein determining the first check channel state information according to the first check channel information comprises: determining the first check channel state information according to the first check channel information and a first neural network model” (See [0038] An AE is a type of neural Network (NN) that may be used to compress and decompress data in an unsupervised manner. [0167] FIG. 6 illustrates a first node 601 comprising a Neural Network, NN, based Auto Encoder, AE, encoder 601-1. [0186] In action 702 the first node 601 computes, with the AE-encoder 601-1, encoder output data based on channel data e.g., training channel data).
Regarding claim 16,
TIMO discloses “A method for receiving channel state information” (See [0001] methods for proprietary ML-based CSI reporting), “comprising: receiving first check channel state information” (See Fig. 6, [0123] A standardized format for signaling AE encoder outputs Y from a UE/chipset-vendor training apparatus to the second node 602. See Fig. 7, [0187] In action 703 the first node 601 provides AE-encoder data to the second node 602 comprising the NN-based AE-decoder 602-1. The AE-encoder data includes the encoder output data computed with the AE-encoder 601-1. [0189] The format of the provided AE-encoder data may match a format of a CSI report comprising AE-encoded CSI); “determining second check channel information according to the first check channel state information” (See [0171] The second node 602 may have access to one or more trained NN-based AE-decoder models for decoding the encoded CSI provided by the first node 601. See Fig. 6, [0174] Details of the second node 602 and/or the network-controlled training service, such as a reconstructed channel Ĥ a loss function, and a method to compute gradients may be transparent to the UE/chipset-vendor training apparatus 601. Note: The AE decoder decodes the encoder output Y to obtain a reconstructed channel Ĥ which corresponds to second channel information), “and determining a network quality identifier according to the second check channel information” (See Fig. 6, [0053] The loss function may be, for example, the Mean Squared Error (MSE) loss calculated as the average of the squared error between the UE's downlink channel estimate H and the network's reconstruction Ĥ. The purpose of the loss function is to meaningfully quantify the reconstruction error for the particular use case at hand. [0190] In action 704 the first node 601 receives, from the second node 602, training assistance information. The training assistance information may comprise a gradient vector of a loss function computed by the second node 602 with respect to a respective encoder parameter of the AE-encoder 601-1. The loss may quantify a reconstruction error of the shared channel data. Note: The second node computes MSE (network quality identifier) according to network's reconstruction Ĥ (second channel information)).
Regarding claim 27,
TIMO discloses “A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is configured to execute, when running, the method according to claim 1” (See Fig. 10, [0138] According to a further aspect, the object is achieved by a carrier comprising the computer program of the aspect above, wherein the carrier is a computer-readable storage medium). See rejection of claim 1 above for disclosure of the rejected method performed by the computer program.
Regarding claim 28,
TIMO discloses “An electronic device, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the method according to claim 1” (See Fig. 10. [0268] FIG. 10 shows an example of the first node 601). See rejection of claim 1 above for disclosure of the rejected method performed by the electronic device.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1) in view of LIU et al. (US 20250070910 A1).
Regarding claim 2,
TIMO discloses “The method for feeding back channel state information according to claim 1”, but does not explicitly disclose that the first check channel information is acquired according to received first signaling.
However, LIU discloses “wherein the first check channel information is acquired by means of one of the following manners: acquiring the first check channel information according to received first signaling” (See Fig. 3, [0287] Step 31: receiving, by a terminal, a downlink signal sent by a network device. [0292] Step 33: encoding, by the terminal, first channel information through the first network model, to obtain to-be-transmitted encoded data [0303] the downlink signal is a downlink reference signal; the determining, by the terminal, the first network model according to the downlink signal includes: [0304] determining, by the terminal, the first channel information according to the downlink reference signal).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO with the teachings of LIU, and the motivation to do so would have been to obtain channel information from a received downlink reference signal, thereby facilitating accurate CSI encoding and feedback.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1) in view of SHI et al. (US 20240137082 A1).
Regarding claim 9,
TIMO discloses “The method for feeding back channel state information according to claim 3”, but does not explicitly disclose that the first check data comprises a known sequence array.
However, SHI discloses “wherein the first check data comprises a known sequence array” (See [0144] the AI model is briefly referred to as a model, and the AI model is considered as mapping from an input parameter (for example, an input matrix) to an output parameter (for example, an output matrix). For example, for the decoder network on the base station side, the input matrix is a matrix determined based on the received CSI. The training data includes a known input matrix, or include a known input matrix and a corresponding output matrix).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO with the teachings of SHI, and the motivation to do so would have been to facilitate reliable training and evaluation of the encoder.
Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1) in view of Mallik et al. (US 20160119951 A1).
Regarding claim 14,
TIMO discloses “The method for feeding back channel state information according to claim 1”, but does not explicitly disclose feeding back the first check channel state information according to a designated report configuration category.
However, Mallik discloses “wherein feeding back the first check channel state information comprises: feeding back the first check channel state information according to a designated report configuration category” (See [0080] the transmitter would indicate the number of channels for the CSI processes and indicate the designated category of CSI reports to send. The UE would then determine which of the channels falls into the designated category and generate the CSI reports for those channels).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO, with the teachings of Mallik, and the motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI feedback payload overhead by selectively reporting CSI satisfying a designated reporting category (Mallik [0076]).
Regarding claim 17,
TIMO discloses “The method for receiving the channel state information according to claim 16”, but does not explicitly disclose receiving the first check channel state information according to a designated report configuration category.
However, Mallik discloses “wherein receiving the first check channel state information comprises: receiving the first check channel state information according to a designated report configuration category” (See [0080] the transmitter would indicate the number of channels for the CSI processes and indicate the designated category of CSI reports to send. The UE would then determine which of the channels falls into the designated category and generate the CSI reports for those channels).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO, with the teachings of Mallik, and the motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI feedback payload overhead by selectively reporting CSI satisfying a designated reporting category (Mallik [0076]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1) in view of SABER et al. (US 20230412230 A1).
Regarding claim 21,
TIMO discloses “The method for receiving channel state information according to claim 16”, but does not explicitly disclose that the second check channel information comprises second check data and second channel information.
However, SABER discloses “wherein the second check channel information comprises second check data and second channel information” (See [0075] a pair of encoder and decoder models may be trained to jointly compress channel information (e.g., a channel matrix, a precoding matrix, and/or the like) and channel quality information that may be determined based on the channel information, e.g., CQI. [0260] the reconstruction of the channel state information may be implemented as a precoding matrix that may be obtained as the output of the ML decoder 704 at the gNB 702. [0200] the post-processor may apply any type of inverse transformation to the output of the reconstruction model to generate the final reconstructed training data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO, with the teachings of SABER, and the motivation to do so would have been to reduce or eliminate mismatch between the channel information and the channel quality information (SABER [0075]).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIMO et al. (US 20260261303 A1) in view of LIU et al. (US 20250070910 A1), and further in view of YAMADA et al. (US 20210175937 A1).
Regarding claim 24,
TIMO discloses “The method for receiving the channel state information according to claim 16”, but does not explicitly disclose transmitting a reference signal used for acquiring the first check channel information.
However, LIU discloses “wherein the method further comprises: transmitting a reference signal, wherein the reference signal is used for acquiring the first check channel information” (See Fig. 3, [0287] Step 31: receiving, by a terminal, a downlink signal sent by a network device. [0292] Step 33: encoding, by the terminal, first channel information through the first network model, to obtain to-be-transmitted encoded data [0303] the downlink signal is a downlink reference signal; the determining, by the terminal, the first network model according to the downlink signal includes: [0304] determining, by the terminal, the first channel information according to the downlink reference signal).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO with the teachings of LIU, and the motivation to do so would have been to obtain channel information from a received downlink reference signal, thereby facilitating accurate CSI encoding and feedback.
TIMO in view of LIU does not explicitly disclose that the reference signal is transmitted according to a designated resource category.
However, YAMADA discloses “transmitting a reference signal according to a designated resource category” (See [0153] The configuration of the CSI-RS for channel measurement transmitted by the base station apparatus 3A is designated as a resource configuration 1, and the configuration of the CSI-RS for the channel measurement transmitted by the base station apparatus 5A is designated as a resource configuration 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of TIMO and LIU, with the teachings of YAMADA, and the motivation to do so would have been to distinguish reference signal resources according to designated resource configurations or categories, thereby facilitating channel measurements using the appropriate reference signals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 10, 18 and 22-23 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, and upon correction of antecedent basis deficiency identified above for claims 22-23.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SALMA A AYAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0285. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 to 5:30 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at 5712723927. 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.
/SALMA AYAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2462
/YEMANE MESFIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights