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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
2. Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14, 17-19, 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. For example, in independent claims 1 and 22, the steps of determining and reporting could all be done by a human (mental process) with pen paper. These claims as well as the dependent claims do not add any significant elements that tie it to a practical application. The additional elements, interface circuit and processor of claims 24 and 25; as well as the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 26 are merely additional generic computer elements that do not add anything meaningful to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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 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.
4. Claims 1-3, 5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 17, 19, 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al WO 2020048438 A1 in view of Zhang WO 2019191970 A1.
5. Consider claim 22. Xue et al teaches (fig 8) a communication apparatus (800), comprising one or more processors (802) and a memory (803), wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the one or more processors are collectively configured to executes the computer program stored in the memory, so as to cause the communication apparatus to determine one or more antenna combinations (equivalent to frequency band combinations) ; and report antenna switching capabilities of the one or more antenna combinations to a network device (…terminal reports the network equipment to the A first radio frequency parameter and the second radio frequency parameter. Reporting RF capabilities through different levels of parameter structures for frequency band combinations, frequency bands, or carriers, can further refine the scope of use of RF capabilities, and can respond to different hardware implementations. When the hardware implementation capabilities are switchable, When the range is large, for the purpose of reducing the signaling overhead, the range of RF capability reporting is also large….). Xue et al fail to explicitly teach determining that a number of downlink data layers is less than or equal to a number of transmitting antennas. However, from the same field of endeavor Zhang teaches such (see precoding matrix which is the antenna port combination is determined by the available number of layers for the uplink and where Zhang further states… the embodiments of the present application can be applied to downlink data transmission…). It would have been obvious, before the effective date to substitute one report out one set of data for another to use the specific combination antenna data as taught by Zhang in Xue in order to have a more accurate report which would make for a more efficient system. Method claims 1 and 11 are rejected for the same reasons as apparatus claim 1, since the recited elements would perform the claimed steps.
6. Regarding claim 2. Note the “or” in the claim allows for claim to be limited to just one of the limitations. Zhang (fig 5) teaches the antenna switching capabilities including a portion (2 of 4) of the one or more antenna combinations. It would have been obvious, before the effective date to include this date in the reporting data as taught by Xue et al in order to maximize efficiency. Method claims 12 and 19 recite the same limitations and is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
7. Regarding claim 3. Zhang (fig 5) teaches wherein reporting the antenna switching capabilities of the portion (2 out of 4) of the one or more antenna combinations to the network device comprises: determining one antenna combination from the one or more of antenna combinations. It would have been obvious, before the effective date to include this date in the reporting data as taught by Xue et al in order to maximize efficiency.
8. Regarding claim 5. Note the “or” in the claim allows for claim to be limited to just one of the limitations. Zhang (fig 5) in combination with Xue (reporting) teaches reporting at least one of a maximum antenna switching configuration (2 out of 4) supported by the terminal to the network device.
9. Regarding claims 8 and 17. Zhang (fig 5) teaches wherein in response to determining that the antenna switching capabilities (2 of 4)of the one or more antenna combinations are reported (Xue et al teaches reporting) to the network device, the method further comprises: reporting, to the network device, a number of alternate (Zhang at fig 6 and fig 7) transmission of an antenna switching configuration among different antenna combinations, wherein the antenna switching configuration is comprised in the antenna switching capabilities.
10. Regarding claim 14. Note the “or” in the claim allows for claim to be limited to just one of the limitations. Xue et al teaches receiving at least one of a supported maximum antenna switching configuration (…the terminal needs to report its two antenna capabilities to the network device before communicating with the network device. Under different antenna capabilities, some radio frequency parameters related to the antenna capability of the terminal are different, and how to report the relevant radio frequency parameters under different antenna capabilities is a problem to be solved….)
11. Regarding claim 23. Xue et al teaches one or more a processor (802) and a memory (803), wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the one or more processors are collectively configured to executes the computer program stored in the memory, so as to cause the communication apparatus to execute the method according to claim 11.
Regarding claims 24 and 25. Zhang (fig. 11) teaches wherein the interface circuit is configured to receive a code instruction and transmit the code instruction to the one or more processors; and the one or more processors are configured to carry out the code instruction according to claims 1 and 11 respectively.
12. Regarding claim 26. Xue teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (803), configured to store an instruction, wherein when the instruction is executed by a processor to implement the method according to claim 1.
13. Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al WO 2020048438 A1 in view of Zhang WO 2019191970 A1 further in view of Duan et al US 20210112498 A1.
14. Regarding claim 4. Note the “or” in the claim allows for claim to be limited to just one of the limitations. The combination of Xue and Zhang fail to teach wherein the terminal supports eight transmitting antennas Tx. and determining the one or more antenna combinations of the terminal comprises: obtaining the one or more antenna combinations by grouping the transmitting antennas Tx However, from the same field of endeavor Duan et al teaches such (0083). It would have been obvious, before the effective date to allow for the additional antenna configurations as taught by Duan et al in the combination in order to conserve more power when transmitting.
15. Regarding claim 6. The combination fails to teach wherein the maximum antenna switching configuration is 8T8R, and the maximum number of data layers is 4. However, from the same field of endeavor Duan et al teaches such (0093). It would have been obvious before the effective date, to use an 8 antenna port system as taught by Duan in order to have more switching capabilities and thus more effective communication system.
16. Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al WO 2020048438 A1 in view of Zhang WO 2019191970 A1 further in view of Guan et al US 20230045308 A1
17. Regarding claim 9. The combination of Xue in view of Zhang fail to explicitly state wherein the terminal comprises a plurality of antenna panels, and each antenna panel comprises one antenna combination. However, from the same field of endeavor Guan et al teaches such (see 0011). It would have been obvious, before the effective date to substitute the antennas used by Guan et al in Xue in order to maximize the signal quality.
18. Regarding claim 18. Guan et al teaches (see 005) wherein the antenna combination is reported by an antenna panel comprised in the terminal.
Claim Objections
19. Claim 10 is 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.
Regarding claim 10. The prior art of record fails to teach or make obvious wherein reporting the antenna switching capabilities of the one or more antenna combinations to the network device comprises at least one of: reporting the antenna switching capabilities of all the plurality of antenna panels to the network device simultaneously; reporting the antenna switching capabilities of all the plurality of antenna panels to the network device separately; reporting the antenna switching capabilities of a portion of the plurality of antenna panels to the network device; and wherein the antenna switching capability of each of the plurality of antenna combinations are one of a same capability, a different capability or a combination of the same capability or the different capability.
20. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shi et al US 2022/0368405 A1 teaches an antenna switching method, a terminal device and a communication device. The method comprises: a first terminal device receives a configuration message; the configuration message indicates M sounding reference signal (SRS) resource set groups, each SRS resource set group contains at least one SRS resource set, and M is a positive integer; each SRS resource set group corresponds to a corresponding antenna switching configuration, and the antenna switching configuration supports the first terminal device to have more than four receiving antennas. Embodiments of the present disclosure can achieve antenna switching for a terminal device having many (e.g., more than four) receiving antennas.
Conclusion
21. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7499. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th from 530am to 330pm and Fri from 530am to 10am.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew D Anderson, can be reached at telephone number 5712724177. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/CURTIS A KUNTZ/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights