DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
In response to the application filed on 08/20/2024, claims 1-20 are currently pending for the examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-3, 8-10, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raghavan et al. (US 2019/0253112 A1) and further in view of Raghavan-2 et al. (US 2020/0244338 A1).
Regarding claim 1; Raghavan teaches a first apparatus comprising at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code being configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first apparatus to perform:
receiving, from a second apparatus controlling an operation of a serving cell, first co-facing factors for a set of first beams (See Figs. 3 and 7: a first wireless communication device for receiving and determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (i.e., serving network node). ¶ [0006] and ¶ [0109]. And See also ¶ [0102]- the co-phasing factor is based at least in part on a set of measurements (i.e., first config info) determined by the first wireless communication device);
receiving, from the second apparatus, second configuration information with an indication to co-phase two or more first beams to one or more second beams (See Figs. 3-6: determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device. ¶ [0099]); and
co-phasing, per a second beam, corresponding two or more first beams to the second beam (See Fig. 7: transmitting the at least one co-phased beam based at least in part on the co-phasing factor (block 720). ¶ [0110]).
Even though, Raghavan teaches receiving co-phasing factor between two transmit beams, Raghavan doesn’t explicitly provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements.
However, Raghavan-2 discloses receiving a configuration information for beam measurements (Raghavan-2- See Figs. 4-5: receiving the first beam measurement report (i.e., first configuration information) indicating a first set of beam measurements for a wireless channel between the first wireless device and the second wireless device. ¶ [0153]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements as taught by Raghavan-2 to have incorporated in the system of Raghavan, so that it would provide to promote an enhanced channel approximation, leading to signal performance (e.g., rate, signal to noise ratio (SNR)) improvement and enhanced signal robustness via beam diversity. Raghavan-2-¶ [0007].
Regarding claim 2; Raghavan in view of Raghavan-2 teaches the first apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first beams and the one or more second beams are P port beams, wherein P is a positive integer (Raghavan-¶ [0045]).
Regarding claim 3; Raghavan teaches the first apparatus wherein the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to perform, per the second beam, the co-phasing by applying a corresponding co-phasing codebook (Raghavan: ¶ [0112]).
Regarding claim 8; Raghavan in view of Raghavan-2 discloses the first apparatus wherein a first beam is associated to a channel state information reference signal resource or to a synchronization signal block resource of a resource set and the second beam is associated with a group of channel state information reference signal resources or to a group of synchronization signal block resources within the resource set (Raghavan-2: P1 beam may be performed over a secondary synchronization signal block (SSB), whereas a P2/P3 procedure may be performed over a channel state information reference signal (CSI RS). ¶ [0080]).
Regarding claim 9; Raghavan in view of Raghavan-2 discloses the first apparatus wherein the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to perform: determining measurements of both the first beams and the second beams; determining a best beam amongst the first beams and the second beams; and reporting to the second apparatus the best beam by indicating a beam index of the best beam (Raghavan-2: The UE 115 may determine the beam pairs according to the beam indices associated with the beam training and include a selected beam f for transmission by the respective TRxP 105 and a selected beam g for reception at the UE. For example, the UE 115 may determine a best beam pairfi, f1, opt=ci and g1, opt=ek based on the beam training initiated by the first TRxP 105. In other examples, the UE 115 may determine a best beam pairfi, f2,opt=dj and g2,opt=e1 based on the beam training initiated by the second TRxP 105. The UE 115 may then measure the received signal power levels (e.g., gain or reference signal received power (RSRP) levels) for beam pairs associated with the identified best beams of the beam trainings. The RSRP for selected beam pair for the beam training initiated by the first TRxP 105 may be denoted RSRPki and the RSRP for the selected beam pair for the beam training initiated by the second TRxP 105 may be denoted RSRPij. ¶ [0100]).
Regarding claim 10; Raghavan teaches a second apparatus comprising at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code being configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the second apparatus to perform:
controlling the operation of a cell serving a first apparatus (See Fig. 6: determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (block 610). ¶ [0099]);
transmitting, to the first apparatus, first configuration information for beam measurements for a set of first beams (See Figs. 6 and 7: transmitting a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (i.e., serving network node). ¶ [0099] and ¶ [0109]. And See also ¶ [0102]- the co-phasing factor is based at least in part on a set of measurements (i.e., first config info) determined by the first wireless communication device); and
transmitting to the first apparatus second configuration information with an indication to co-phase two or more first beams to one or more second beams (See Figs. 3-6: transmitting a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device. ¶ [0099] and ¶ [0109]).
Even though, Raghavan teaches receiving co-phasing factor between two transmit beams, Raghavan doesn’t explicitly provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements.
However, Raghavan-2 discloses receiving a configuration information for beam measurements (Raghavan-2- See Figs. 4-5: receiving the first beam measurement report (i.e., first configuration information) indicating a first set of beam measurements for a wireless channel between the first wireless device and the second wireless device. ¶ [0153]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements as taught by Raghavan-2 to have incorporated in the system of Raghavan, so that it would provide to promote an enhanced channel approximation, leading to signal performance (e.g., rate, signal to noise ratio (SNR)) improvement and enhanced signal robustness via beam diversity. Raghavan-2-¶ [0007].
Regarding claim 15: Raghavan teaches a method comprising:
receiving, from a second apparatus controlling an operation of a serving cell, first co-facing factors for a set of first beams (See Figs. 3 and 7: a first wireless communication device for receiving and determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (i.e., serving network node). ¶ [0006] and ¶ [0109]. And See also ¶ [0102]- the co-phasing factor is based at least in part on a set of measurements (i.e., first config info) determined by the first wireless communication device);
receiving, from the second apparatus, second configuration information with an indication to co-phase two or more first beams to one or more second beams (See Figs. 3-6: determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device. ¶ [0099]); and
co-phasing, per a second beam, corresponding two or more first beams to the second beam (See Fig. 7: transmitting the at least one co-phased beam based at least in part on the co-phasing factor (block 720). ¶ [0110]).
Even though, Raghavan teaches receiving co-phasing factor between two transmit beams, Raghavan doesn’t explicitly provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements.
However, Raghavan-2 discloses receiving a configuration information for beam measurements (Raghavan-2- See Figs. 4-5: receiving the first beam measurement report (i.e., first configuration information) indicating a first set of beam measurements for a wireless channel between the first wireless device and the second wireless device. ¶ [0153]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements as taught by Raghavan-2 to have incorporated in the system of Raghavan, so that it would provide to promote an enhanced channel approximation, leading to signal performance (e.g., rate, signal to noise ratio (SNR)) improvement and enhanced signal robustness via beam diversity. Raghavan-2-¶ [0007].
Regarding claim 16: Raghavan teaches a method comprising:
controlling the operation of a cell serving a first apparatus (See Fig. 6: determining a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (block 610). ¶ [0099]);
transmitting, to the first apparatus, first configuration information for beam measurements for a set of first beams (See Figs. 6 and 7: transmitting a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device (i.e., serving network node). ¶ [0099] and ¶ [0109]. And See also ¶ [0102]- the co-phasing factor is based at least in part on a set of measurements (i.e., first config info) determined by the first wireless communication device); and
transmitting to the first apparatus second configuration information with an indication to co-phase two or more first beams to one or more second beams (See Figs. 3-6: transmitting a co-phasing factor between at least two transmit beams transmitted by a second wireless communication device. ¶ [0099] and ¶ [0109]).
Even though, Raghavan teaches receiving co-phasing factor between two transmit beams, Raghavan doesn’t explicitly provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements.
However, Raghavan-2 discloses receiving a configuration information for beam measurements (Raghavan-2- See Figs. 4-5: receiving the first beam measurement report (i.e., first configuration information) indicating a first set of beam measurements for a wireless channel between the first wireless device and the second wireless device. ¶ [0153]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide receiving a configuration information for beam measurements as taught by Raghavan-2 to have incorporated in the system of Raghavan, so that it would provide to promote an enhanced channel approximation, leading to signal performance (e.g., rate, signal to noise ratio (SNR)) improvement and enhanced signal robustness via beam diversity. Raghavan-2-¶ [0007].
Regarding claim 17; Raghavan in view of Raghavan-2 teaches the method, wherein the first beams and the one or more second beams are P port beams, wherein P is a positive integer (Raghavan-¶ [0045]).
Regarding claim 18; Raghavan teaches the method wherein the at least one memory and computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first apparatus to perform, per the second beam, the co-phasing by applying a corresponding co-phasing codebook (Raghavan: ¶ [0112]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 11-14, and 19-20 are objected to as being dependent upon the rejected base claims but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhohov et al. (US 20220078099 A1 to discuss the method for Latency Estimation in Wireless Networks).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/SAI AUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights