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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restriction
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
Restriction is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 and 372.
This application contains the following inventions or groups of inventions which are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
In accordance with 37 CFR 1.499, applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single invention to which the claims must be restricted.
Group I, claim(s) 1-10 and 29, drawn to a base station includes exchanging an assistance information with a plurality of neighbor/adjacent base stations based on a master-slave base station model, an inter-cell cluster information exchange, an information exchange above a threshold value, or an offline information exchange, wherein the assistance information comprises a downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) configuration information, a scheduling information, a traffic information, a CLI measurement report, and/or a sounding reference signal (SRS) measurement, classified in H04L 5/0073.
Group II, claim(s) 17-25, drawn a base station performing a timing advancement and timing delay execution, wherein the base station and the neighbor/adjacent base stations are grouped into a cluster or group of base stations, and the cluster or group of base stations identifies a DL/UL configuration status, classified in H04W 56/0075.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Groups I and II lack unity of invention because the groups do not share the same or corresponding technical feature.
During a telephone conversation with Wei Te Chung on 8/14/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-10 and 29. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 17-25 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 10, 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904).
Regarding claim 1, 29, ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904) discloses a wireless communication method of inter-cell coordination signaling reduction for cross link interference (CLI) mitigation in dynamic time division duplex (TDD), performed by a base station, comprising:
exchanging an assistance information with a plurality of neighbor/adjacent base stations based on a master-slave base station model, an inter-cell cluster information exchange, an information exchange above a threshold value, or an offline information exchange (ESSWEI: ¶131-133, Fig. 4, RFC feedback information is shared and exchanged between the base stations of a cluster in a master/slave BS model),
wherein the assistance information comprises a downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) configuration information, a scheduling information, a traffic information, a CLI measurement report, and/or a sounding reference signal (SRS) measurement (ESSWEI: ¶134, ¶139, Fig. 1, the assistance information is received in form of selected RFCs of each base station in the cluster which belongs to the master BS of that cluster; this is also an UL and DL scheduling information; this is also based on traffic demand (¶123) of a base station equivalent to traffic information);,
Regarding claim 2, ESSWEI discloses the wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein the assistance information is exchanged between the base station and the neighbor/adjacent base stations using a layer 1 (L1) signaling or a radio resource control (RRC) signaling through an Xn interface (ESSWEI: ¶139, Xn interface is used to exchange RFC (assistance information)).
Regarding claim 4, ESSWEI discloses the wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein the base station and the neighbor/adjacent base stations are grouped into a cluster or group of base stations, the master-slave base station model is used within the cluster or the group of base stations to exchange the assistance information, one base station of the cluster or the group of base stations is a master base station, and the other base stations of the cluster or the group of base stations are salve base stations (ESSWEI: Fig. 4, ¶131-134, the master BS communicates with its cluster’s slave BSs to exchange information on RFC (See Fig. 1) and transmits to the slave BSs, the updated RFCs).
Regarding claim 10, ESSWEI wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein the base station and the neighbor/adjacent base stations are grouped into a cluster or group of base stations, the information exchange above the threshold value is used within the cluster or the group of base stations , and the information exchange above the threshold value defines the threshold value for a DL or UL traffic and shares the assistance information between the cluster or the group of base stations above the threshold value (ESSWEI: Fig. 9, ¶175, ¶189, the assistance information is updated when there is a change/high or low threshold crossed for the traffic load in the UL and DL traffic loads per cell).
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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904) in view KELA et al (US 2018/0254849).
Regarding claim 6, ESSWEI discloses the wireless communication method according to claim 1, wherein the base station and the neighbor/adjacent base stations are grouped into a plurality of clusters or groups of base stations (ESSWEI: Fig. 4, ¶132, a cluster of base stations with a master base station)
ESSWEI remains silent regarding, however, KELA et al (US 2018/0254849) discloses a plurality of clusters comprising a first cluster or group of base stations and a second cluster or group of base stations (KELA: ¶10, plurality of clusters with plurality of base stations in each cluster), the inter-cell cluster information exchange is used within the clusters or the groups of base stations to exchange the assistance information (KELA: ¶61, interference information is exchanged between cluster in an inter-cell cluster information exchange).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of ESSWEI would have been motivated to use the teachings of KELA as it provides predicting and/or mitigating the interference experienced by users in wireless networks which is caused by neighboring and possibly uncoordinated clusters/access-nodes (¶61). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of ESSWEI with teachings of KELA in order to improve throughput in presence of multiple clusters.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904) in view KELA et al (US 2018/0254849) as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of WANG et al (US 2016/0044515)
Regarding claim 7, ESSWEI modified by KELA discloses the wireless communication method according to claim 6, wherein in the inter-cell cluster information exchange, the first cluster or group of base stations is configured, the second cluster or group of base stations is configured , and the assistance information is exchanged between the first cluster or group of base stations and the second cluster or group of base stations (ESSWEI: Fig. 6, ¶79-80, the interference leakage information is obtained from each user and is shared between the control entities of other clusters).
ESSWEI modified by KELA remains silent regarding the first cluster is configured in a DL direction and the second cluster is configured in an UL direction.
However, WANG et al (US 2016/0044515) discloses the first cluster is configured in a DL direction and the second cluster is configured in an UL direction (WANG: ¶38, ¶46, Table 3 cross link interference is between clusters with different UL/DL configurations as UL in one cluster overlaps in time with DL in the other cluster ).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of ESSWEI modified by KELA would have been motivated to use the teachings of WANG et al (US 2016/0044515) as it provides predicting and/or mitigating the interference experienced by users in wireless networks which is caused by neighboring and possibly uncoordinated clusters/access-nodes (¶61). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of ESSWEI modified by KELA with teachings of WANG et al (US 2016/0044515)in order to improve throughput in presence of multiple clusters.
Regarding claim 8. ESSWEI modified by KELA modified by WANG discloses wireless communication method according to claim 7, wherein the assistance information is exchanged between a master base station of the first cluster and a master base station of the second cluster (ESSWEI: Fig. 6, ¶79-80, the interference leakage information is obtained from each user and is shared between the control entities of other clusters).
Regarding claim 9. ESSWEI modified by KELA modified by WANG discloses wireless communication method according to claim 8, wherein the master base station of the first cluster or group of base stations exchanges an information of a DL/UL traffic direction of the assistance information with the slave base stations of the first cluster or group of base stations, and/or the master base station of the second cluster or group of base stations exchanges the information of the DL/UL traffic direction of the assistance information with the salve base stations of the second cluster or group of base stations (ESSWEI: Fig. 4, ¶131-134, the master BS communicates and receives from its cluster’s slave BSs an information on RFC (See Fig. 1) and transmits to the slave BSs, the updated RFCs updating the RFCs of the slave BSs; the RFC information is the UL/DL configuration information).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904) in view of XU et al (US 2026/0128808)
Regarding claim 3, ESSWEI discloses wireless communication method according to claim 2. ESSWIE remains silent regarding, however, XU et al (US 2026/0128808) discloses L1 signaling comprises a bitmap used to exchange the DL/UL configuration information or the scheduling information in a slot or a subframe, and/or the RRC signaling is used to exchange the traffic information, the CLI measurement report, or the SRS measurement (XU: ¶144, the CLI measurement is communicated over RRC signaling).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of ESSWEI would have been motivated to use the teachings of XU et al (US 2026/0128808) as it provides robust signaling protocol to communicate essential control information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of ESSWEI with teachings of XU et al (US 2026/0128808)in order to improve control signaling reliability.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ESSWEI et al (US 2021/0351904) in view of ISEDA et al (US 2009/0245196)
Regarding claim 5, ESSWIE discloses the wireless communication method according to claim 4, wherein in the master-slave base station model, the slave base stations exchange the assistance information with the master base station, and the master base station calculates and generates the assistance information of the entire base stations within a cluster or a group of base stations into a message and shares the with the salve base stations (ESSWEI: Fig. 4, ¶131-134, the master BS communicates and receives from its cluster’s slave BSs an information on RFC (See Fig. 1) and transmits to the slave BSs, the updated RFCs updating the RFCs of the slave BSs).
ESSWEI remains silent regarding tabulating the assistance information.
However, ISEDA et al (US 2009/0245196) discloses tabulating the assistance information (ISEDA: Fig. 4, ¶100, shows interference assistance information in form of a table).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of ESSWEI would have been motivated to use the teachings of ISEDA as it provides organized information which is machine and human readable form. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of ESSWEI with teachings of ISEDA in order to improve data element format by organizing information elements in a machine readable and human readable friendly manner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
See attached PTO-892
Document U discloses that a sophisticated framework where User Equipment's (UEs) are used as sensors detecting CLI problems is outlined, and the underlying design rationales are presented. Solutions for simple coordination of TDD radio frame configurations between network elements are described. Solutions based on simple reinforcement learning algorithms for the network to adjust the TDD radio frame configuration are proposed, and validated for both macro and indoor factory deployments, considering both ultra-reliable low latency communication (URLLC) and enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB) traffic. Results from extensive dynamic system-level simulations confirm that such solutions offer attractive benefits.
Document V discloses that dynamic time division duplex (D-TDD) dynamically allocates the transmission directions for traffic adaptation in each cell. D-TDD systems are receiving a lot of attention because they can reduce latency and increase spectrum utilization via flexible and dynamic duplex operation in 5G New Radio (NR). However, the advantages of the D-TDD system are difficult to fully utilize due to the cross-link interference (CLI) arising from the use of different transmission directions between adjacent cells. This paper is a survey of the research from academia and the standardization efforts being undertaken to solve this CLI problem and make the D-TDD system a reality. Specifically, we categorize and present the approaches to mitigating CLI according to operational principles. Furthermore, we present the signaling necessary to apply the CLI mitigation schemes. We also present information-theoretic performance analysis of D-TDD systems in various environments. As topics for future works, we discuss the research challenges and opportunities associated with the CLI mitigation schemes and signaling design in a variety of environments. This survey is recommended for those who are in the initial stage of studying D-TDD systems and those who wish to develop a more feasible D-TDD system as a baseline for reviewing the research flow and standardization trends surrounding D-TDD systems and to identify areas of focus for future works.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights