DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims 14-22, 27, 42-51 are pending.
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) 14-17, 27, 42-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kaya et al. US 20220190883.
Regarding claim 14, A user equipment (UE) (UE, Figure 12) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more processors (processor, Figure 12, element 1204), one or more memories (element 1206) coupled to the one or more processors; the one or more memories comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the UE to: communicate with a network entity (base station, Figure 1, element 134) using a first beam set (for initial beam establishment, a BS may transmit a SSB (or SSB/PBCH) reference signal via each of a plurality of SSB beams, a UE performs a signal measurement and determine a best or a highest power SSB beam and an initial beam pair is used, para. 0035); communicate with the network entity using a second beam set that is predicted using a beam prediction model based on at least in part the first beam set (a base station determines a predicted future sequence of beams for a UE based on the beam sequence model and a past beam sequence for the UE, a past beam sequence for a UE includes one or more beams that were actually used to communicate between the BS and UE, and/or one more best beams that were reported in a measurement report, para. 0046); and reconfigure the beam prediction model in response to a change of a prediction condition that comprises at least one of a discontinuous reception (DRX) mode of the UE, a change in UE mobility, a prediction error of the beam prediction model, or an interference level (based on a prediction error, one or more parameters of the beam sequence model are tuned or adjusted to reduce or minimize the error and to improve the prediction performance of the beam sequence model, para. 0084, changing, by the BS based on the predicted future beam sequence for the UE, a transmit beam used by the BS for downlink transmission to the UE and a receive beam used by the BS for uplink reception from the UE and sending, by the BS to the UE, an updated report configuration to adjust a number of beams, or a number of associated reference signal resources, to be measured and/or reported by the UE within a beam measurement report, para. 0052).
Regarding claim 15, The UE of claim 14, wherein, to reconfigure the beam prediction model, the instructions further cause the UE to at least one of: activate or deactivate the beam prediction model; change the beam prediction model from a first mode to a second mode; or change a periodicity of operating the beam prediction model (based on a prediction error, one or more parameters of the beam sequence model are tuned or adjusted to reduce or minimize the error and to improve the prediction performance of the beam sequence model, para. 0084, UE receives from BS an updated report configuration to adjust a number of beams, or a number of associated reference signal resources, to be measured and/or reported by the UE within a beam measurement report, para. 0052, the BS may set infrequent periodic beam reporting for each UE to ensure that the prediction is working correctly, para. 0095).
Regarding claim 16, The UE of claim 15, wherein the first mode and the second mode are different in terms of, at least one of: a prediction function configured to predict one or more beams; at least one input parameter of the beam prediction model; or at least one output parameter of the beam prediction model (changing, by the BS based on the predicted future beam sequence for the UE, a transmit beam used by the BS for downlink transmission to the UE and a receive beam used by the BS for uplink reception from the UE and sending, by the BS to the UE, an updated report configuration to adjust a number of beams, or a number of associated reference signal resources, to be measured and/or reported by the UE within a beam measurement report, para. 0052).
Regarding claim 42, a network entity (base station BS, Figure 12) of a wireless communication network, comprising: one or more processors (processor, element 1204); and one or more memories (memory, element 1206) coupled to the one or more processors, one or more memories comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the network entity to: communicate with a user equipment (UE) using a first beam set (for initial beam establishment, a BS may transmit a SSB (or SSB/PBCH) reference signal via each of a plurality of SSB beams, a UE performs a signal measurement and determine a best or a highest power SSB beam and an initial beam pair is used, para. 0035); communicate with the UE using a second beam set that is predicted using a beam prediction model based on at least in part the first beam set (a base station determines a predicted future sequence of beams for a UE based on the beam sequence model and a past beam sequence for the UE, a past beam sequence for a UE includes one or more beams that were actually used to communicate between the BS and UE, and/or one more best beams that were reported in a measurement report, para. 0046); and reconfigure the beam prediction model in response to a change of a prediction condition that comprises at least one of a discontinuous reception (DRX) mode of the UE, a change in UE mobility, a prediction error of the beam prediction model, or an interference level (based on a prediction error, one or more parameters of the beam sequence model are tuned or adjusted to reduce or minimize the error and to improve the prediction performance of the beam sequence model, para. 0084, changing, by the BS based on the predicted future beam sequence for the UE, a transmit beam used by the BS for downlink transmission to the UE and a receive beam used by the BS for uplink reception from the UE and sending, by the BS to the UE, an updated report configuration to adjust a number of beams, or a number of associated reference signal resources, to be measured and/or reported by the UE within a beam measurement report, para. 0052).
Regarding claim 43, The network entity of claim 42, wherein, to reconfigure the beam prediction model, the instructions further cause the network entity to at least one of: activate or deactivate the beam prediction model; change the beam prediction model from a first mode to a second mode; or change a periodicity of operating the beam prediction model (sending, by the BS to the UE, an updated report configuration to adjust a number of beams, or a number of associated reference signal resources, to be measured and/or reported by the UE within a beam measurement report, para. 0052, the BS may turn off extensive measurement reporting by decreasing frequency or number of measurement reports when there is consistent or sufficient network utilization, and fewer resources are available for measurement reports, para. 0093, the BS may set infrequent periodic beam reporting for each UE to ensure that the prediction is working correctly, para. 0095).
Claims 27, 44 are rejected under the same rationale.
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) 17, 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaya in view of Sun et al. US 20260181406.
Regarding claim 17, The UE of claim 14, Kaya does not expressly disclose wherein, to reconfigure the beam prediction model, the instructions further cause the UE to initiate reconfiguration of the beam prediction model based on a command from the network entity in response to the change of the prediction condition.
Sun discloses a base station determining an artificial intelligence model for a user equipment (UE) from a plurality of artificial intelligence models for beam prediction based on a beam measurement result reported by the UE; and sending, to the UE, indication information associated with the determined artificial intelligence model, para. 0016, the indication information associated with the determined artificial intelligence model may include at least one of: the determined artificial intelligence model; the model parameter set of the determined artificial intelligence model; and an indicator of the determined artificial intelligence model, para. 0094. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kaya’s beam prediction model and beam adjustment changes due to measurement reports with Sun’s sending of beam prediction model to UE for UE to utilize. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to jointly maintain good radio connectivity, para. 0004.
Regarding claim 45, The network entity of claim 42, Kaya does not expressly disclose wherein, to reconfigure the beam prediction model, the instructions further cause the network entity to: send a command to initiate reconfiguration of the beam prediction model in response to a report from the UE, the report indicating the change of the prediction condition.
Sun discloses a base station determining an artificial intelligence model for a user equipment (UE) from a plurality of artificial intelligence models for beam prediction based on a beam measurement result reported by the UE; and sending, to the UE, indication information associated with the determined artificial intelligence model, para. 0016, the indication information associated with the determined artificial intelligence model may include at least one of: the determined artificial intelligence model; the model parameter set of the determined artificial intelligence model; and an indicator of the determined artificial intelligence model, para. 0094. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kaya’s beam prediction model and beam adjustment changes due to measurement reports with Sun’s sending of beam prediction model to UE for UE to utilize. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to jointly maintain good radio connectivity, para. 0004.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-22, 46-51 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li et al. US 20250280316 discloses the terminal device determines a L1-RSRP or L1-SINR corresponding to each receiving beam, and the first relative value of the first dimensional direction angle corresponding to each of respective receiving beams, and determines the measurement report, and send the measurement report including the first relative value of the first dimensional direction angle corresponding to each receiving beam so that he network side device can determine an AI beam model based on the measurement report to improve beam prediction accuracy of the AI beam model.
Zhu US 20240056844 discloses indicating a beam prediction capability of a user equipment to a network and receiving back network antenna configuration identification, a beam prediction model is selected based on the network antenna configuration identification, measuring reference signals based on a received configuration of reference signal resources and performing beam prediction based on the measured references signals using the selected model.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights