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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner
Claim Interpretation
The following terms are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. No limitation is treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), and no claim is found indefinite.
Regarding the term “TRP or TRP group” is interpreted as a transmit receive point is a transmission point of the network identified to the UE by the resource on which it transmits, and a TRP group is any set of one or more such points treated together for CSI reporting. A per-TRP non-zero-power CSI-RS resource identifies the TRP whose channel is measured on that resource. (Refer to the published spec instances in para. [0048], [0058], [0059], [0174])
With respect to the term “a quantity of subbands for CSI reporting” in the claims 2 and 3 are interpreted as the number of subbands used for the CSI report, which the art of record expresses both as the number of PMI subbands (N3) and as the number of CQI subbands (NSB), the two being related by a configured scaling factor R. (Refer to the published spec instances in paragraphs [0103] and [0118])
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)(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, 2, 4-9, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Muruganathan (US 2024/0364400 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to:, because Muruganathan teaches a user equipment having processing circuitry coupled to a memory that stores the programs the processing circuitry executes: (Muruganathan, para [0319] “The UE 1400 includes processing circuitry 1402 that is operatively coupled via a bus 1404 to an input/output interface 1406 . . . certain UEs may contain multiple instances of a component, such as multiple processors, memories, transceivers, transmitters, receivers, etc.”; Muruganathan, para [0320] “The processing circuitry 1402 is configured to process instructions and data and may be configured to implement any sequential state machine operative to execute instructions stored as machine-readable computer programs in the memory 1410.”)
Furthermore, Muruganathan discloses: receive a configuration of a quantity M of selected frequency domain (FD) bases for channel state information (CSI) reporting that represents a total quantity of selected FD bases across multiple transmit receive points (TRPs) or TRP groups, independent of selected TRPs for a CSI report, a CSI reporting configuration that signals several per-TRP measurement resources together with a single ceiling on the number of frequency domain basis vectors summed over all of those resources (i.e., “a total quantity of selected FD bases across multiple transmit receive points (TRPs)” as claimed) , the ceiling being signaled by the network for the report while the UE separately selects which of the points participate, so that the configured quantity is an aggregate over the points and does not track the selection(i.e., “independent of selected TRPs for a CSI report” as claimed): (Muruganathan, para [0228] “the UE may be signaled with S>1 NZP CSI-RS resource(s) in a CSI reporting configuration to perform channel measurement for the purpose of calculating CSI”; Muruganathan, para [0232] “The S=3 NZP CSI-RS resources denoted as CSI-RS resources 1, 2, and 3 are transmitted from TRPs 1, 2, and 3, respectively.”; Muruganathan, para [0287] “The gNB only needs to configure the maximum total number of FD basis vectors selected by UE for all NZP CSI-RS resources, it is up to the UE to report the actual number of selected FD basis vectors for each NZP CSI-RS.”; Muruganathan, para [0273] “In some cases, Mmax may be specified in 3GPP specifications while in other cases, Mmax may be configured to the UE via RRC signaling.”; Muruganathan, para [0234] “the UE selects a subset S' (where S≥S'>1) of the NZP CSI-RS resources to calculate CSI corresponding to CJT”)
Moreover, Muruganathan discloses: select FD bases for the CSI report based at least in part on M, because Muruganathan teaches selection of the frequency domain basis vectors for each point subject to that configured total, the per-point selections together making up the total number of selected bases carried by the report: (Muruganathan, para [0288] “The bitmap for NZP CSI-RS resource s contains Ms ones (0≤Ms≤Ms'), indicating the Ms FD basis vectors selected by the UE.”; Muruganathan, para [0288] “Denote Mmax the maximum limit on the total number of orthogonal FD basis vectors selected over all S NZP CSI-RS resources, Σs=0S−1 Ms≤Mmax shall be fulfilled.”; Muruganathan, para [0253] “Mtotal is the total number of selected FD basis vectors out of the N3 orthogonal FD DFT basis vectors {f0 f1 . . . fN3−1} for all S NZP CSI-RS resources”)
In addition, Muruganathan discloses: transmit the CSI report based at least in part on measurements of one or more CSI reference signals (CSI-RSs), using the FD bases for the CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches measurement of the configured non-zero-power reference signal resources and feedback of the selected frequency domain basis vectors as components of the reported precoding matrix indicator: (Muruganathan, para [0228] “The UE is configured by the gNB with NZP CSI-RS resource(s) for channel measurement.”; Muruganathan, para [0256] “In terms of CSI reporting, the above orthogonal FD vectors selected are fed back as part of the i1 component of the PMI (TS 38.214 V16.5.0).”; Muruganathan, para [0260] “S different combinatorial indices i1,6,l(s), s=0,1, . . . , S−1 are reported per layer l as part of i1 component of the PMI”)
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, to select the FD bases for the CSI report, are configured to select the FD bases for the CSI report from within a selection window having a size that is larger than 2 × M if a quantity of subbands for CSI reporting is greater than 19, because Muruganathan teaches selection of the frequency domain vectors from a window whose length is a multiple of M greater than two whenever the number of reporting subbands exceeds nineteen, the longer window being adopted expressly because the channels to the several points differ in average delay: (Muruganathan, para [0258] “when the number of PMI subbands N3 is larger than a predefined value (e.g., N3>19), the orthogonal FD vectors corresponding to the channels measured on all S NZP CSI-RS resources are selected from a single window of length xM in the frequency domain”; Muruganathan, para [0258] “when S>1 NZP CSI-RS resources for channel measurement for the purpose of CJT CSI reporting, the orthogonal FD vectors corresponding to all S NZP CSI-RS resources are selected from a single window of length xM in the frequency domain where x>2”; Muruganathan, para [0255] “N3=NSBR is the number of PMI subbands, NSB is the number of CQI subbands, R is a scaling factor.”)
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein M is based at least in part on an FD-joint codebook for the selected TRPs or TRP groups, because Muruganathan teaches one codebook parameter combination configured jointly for all of the measured channels, from which the number of frequency domain vectors is computed: (Muruganathan, para [0255] “the UE is configured with a single parameter combination (N3, R, p) that is applied to all the channels measured (e.g., H1, H2, H3) for CJT CSI feedback”; Muruganathan, para [0255] “M=⌈p×N3/R⌉ is the maximum number of orthogonal FD vectors selected per layer for each of the channels measured on the NZP CSI-RS resources configured for CJT CSI feedback”)
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 4, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 4, wherein the total quantity of selected FD bases is based at least in part on a union set of all FD basis selection sets for the multiple TRPs or TRP groups, because Muruganathan teaches a total taken over the basis vectors selected for all of the per-point resources together, the per-point selections being the constituent sets that make up that total: (Muruganathan, para [0253] “Mtotal is the total number of selected FD basis vectors out of the N3 orthogonal FD DFT basis vectors {f0 f1 . . . fN3−1} for all S NZP CSI-RS resources”; Muruganathan, para [0288] “Denote Mmax the maximum limit on the total number of orthogonal FD basis vectors selected over all S NZP CSI-RS resources, Σs=0S−1 Ms≤Mmax shall be fulfilled.”)
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein M is based at least in part on separate codebooks for the selected TRPs or TRP groups, because Muruganathan teaches a separate codebook parameter configured for each per-point measurement resource, from which that point's own number of frequency domain vectors is computed: (Muruganathan, para [0271] “the gNB configures the UE with the corresponding ps parameter for each of the NZP CSI-RS resources (i.e., the gNB configures p0, p1, . . . , pS−1 to the UE)”; Muruganathan, para [0271] “In some embodiments, the different ps parameters are signaled as part of a list of parameter combinations (e.g., a list of paramCombination-r16 parameters).”)
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 6, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 6, wherein the total quantity of selected FD bases is based at least in part on all FD bases for the multiple TRPs or TRP groups, because Muruganathan teaches a single maximum specified over all of the points that bounds the sum of the per-point counts even where those counts differ: (Muruganathan, para [0273] “In some embodiments, a maximum limit on the total number of orthogonal FD basis vectors per layer over all S NZP CSI-RS resources may be specified such that Σs=0S−1 Ms≤Mmax.”; Muruganathan, para [0287] “The gNB only needs to configure the maximum total number of FD basis vectors selected by UE for all NZP CSI-RS resources, it is up to the UE to report the actual number of selected FD basis vectors for each NZP CSI-RS.”)
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein the CSI report indicates locations of one or more selection windows for the selected FD bases, because Muruganathan teaches reporting of the starting point of the window, or of each window where several are used, as an index carried in the precoding matrix indicator of the report: (Muruganathan, para [0258] “the starting point of the single window in the frequency domain is reported via a single index i1,5 which can take a value in the range {0,1, . . . , xM−1}”; Muruganathan, para [0259] “the starting point of each of the S>1 windows in the frequency domain are reported via multiple indices i1,5(s), s=0,1, . . . , S−1”)
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 8, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 8, wherein the one or more selection windows include a first selection window that is associated with a reference TRP or TRP group, because Muruganathan teaches windows that each belong to the channel measured on one particular per-point resource, the correspondence being fixed by a sorting rule under which the first measured channel, and hence the first window, is the one belonging to the first resource on the sorted list: (Muruganathan, para [0259] “i1,5(s) denotes the starting point of the window corresponding to the channel measured on the sth NZP CSI-RS resource”; Muruganathan, para [0263] “the NZP CSI-RS resources configured for channel measurement for CJT CSI reporting are sorted (e.g., in ascending or descending order) according to the NZP CSI-RS resource ID”)
Furthermore, Muruganathan discloses: and wherein the CSI report includes first bits that indicate a location of the first selection window, because Muruganathan teaches reporting of that first window's starting point as one of the indices carried in the first component of the precoding matrix indicator: (Muruganathan, para [0259] “The multiple indices i1,5(s), s=0,1, . . . , S−1 are reported as part of the i1 component of the PMI.”)
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 8, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 8, wherein the one or more selection windows are based on a threshold quantity of subbands, because Muruganathan teaches formation of a window at all being conditioned on a comparison of the reporting subband count against a predefined value: (Muruganathan, para [0258] “when the number of PMI subbands N3 is larger than a predefined value (e.g., N3>19), the orthogonal FD vectors corresponding to the channels measured on all S NZP CSI-RS resources are selected from a single window of length xM in the frequency domain”; Muruganathan, para [0262] “when the number of PMI subbands N3 is less than or equal to a predefined value (e.g., N3≤19)”; Muruganathan, para [0262] “is used to determine the M orthogonal FD vectors for the lth layer corresponding to the measured channel Hs without determining an intermediate window”)
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein the CSI report indicates the FD bases for the CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches feedback of the selected frequency domain vectors as components of the reported precoding matrix indicator: (Muruganathan, para [0256] “In terms of CSI reporting, the above orthogonal FD vectors selected are fed back as part of the i1 component of the PMI (TS 38.214 V16.5.0).”)
Furthermore, Muruganathan discloses: and wherein the FD bases are for the multiple TRPs or TRP groups jointly, because Muruganathan teaches vectors for all of the per-point resources taken from one common window identified by a single reported index that is the same for every layer, so that the reported bases pertain to the several points jointly rather than separately: (Muruganathan, para [0258] “the orthogonal FD vectors corresponding to all S NZP CSI-RS resources are selected from a single window of length xM in the frequency domain where x>2”; Muruganathan, para [0258] “the single index i1,5 is layer common (i.e., the same index applies to all transmission layers l)”)
Regarding claim 17, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein M is based at least in part on a rank indicated in CSI, because Muruganathan teaches computation of the number of frequency domain vectors from a parameter that is expressly rank dependent, so that the reported rank governs the value: (Muruganathan, para [0255] “The parameter p is rank dependent and is provided by the higher layer parameter paramCombination-r16 according to TS 38.214 V16.5.0.”; Muruganathan, para [0255] “M=⌈p×N3/R⌉ is the maximum number of orthogonal FD vectors selected per layer for each of the channels measured on the NZP CSI-RS resources configured for CJT CSI feedback”)
Regarding claim 18, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein a quantity of FD bases within a selection window for each TRP or TRP group is based at least in part on a quantity of the selected TRPs or TRP groups for the CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches a per-point window from which that point's bases are drawn, together with a single ceiling on the sum of the per-point counts, so that the count available to any one point is set in view of how many points share the ceiling: (Muruganathan, para [0275] “The length of the sth window corresponding to the channel measured on the sth NZP CSI-RS resource (i.e., window corresponding to measured channel Hs) is xMs in the frequency domain where x≥2.”; Muruganathan, para [0287] “different number of FD basis vectors can be selected for different TRPs (hence the associated NZP CSI-RS) based on channel condition”; Muruganathan necessarily so, because the reference constrains the per-resource counts by Σs=0S−1 Ms≤Mmax over the S resources, so the number of bases available within any one point's window is necessarily a function of how many points draw on that same ceiling (see Muruganathan, para [0288]))
Regarding claim 20, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein the CSI report indicates a quantity of the selected TRPs or TRP groups in CSI part 1, because Muruganathan teaches reporting of the number of per-point resources the UE selected in the first part of the CSI report: (Muruganathan, para [0234] “the number S' is reported as part of CSI part 1, and indicators indicating the selected subset of S' NZP CSI-RS resources are reported as part of CSI part 2”)
Regarding claim 21, Muruganathan discloses: A network entity for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to:, because Muruganathan teaches a network node having processing circuitry and memory: (Muruganathan, para [0335] “The network node 1500 includes processing circuitry 1502, memory 1504, a communication interface 1506, and a power source 1508.”; Muruganathan, para [0336] “The processing circuitry 1502 may comprise a combination of one or more of a microprocessor, controller, microcontroller, CPU, DSP, ASIC, FPGA, or any other suitable computing device”)
Furthermore, Muruganathan discloses: transmit a configuration of a quantity M of selected frequency domain (FD) bases for channel state information (CSI) reporting that represents a total quantity of selected FD bases across multiple transmit receive points (TRPs) or TRP groups, independent of selected TRPs for a CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches signaling of the reporting configuration with the several per-point measurement resources and configuration of the single ceiling on the number of frequency domain basis vectors summed over all of them, the participating subset being left to the UE: (Muruganathan, para [0228] “the UE may be signaled with S>1 NZP CSI-RS resource(s) in a CSI reporting configuration to perform channel measurement for the purpose of calculating CSI”; Muruganathan, para [0287] “The gNB only needs to configure the maximum total number of FD basis vectors selected by UE for all NZP CSI-RS resources, it is up to the UE to report the actual number of selected FD basis vectors for each NZP CSI-RS.”; Muruganathan, para [0273] “In some cases, Mmax may be specified in 3GPP specifications while in other cases, Mmax may be configured to the UE via RRC signaling.”)
Moreover, Muruganathan discloses: transmit one or more CSI reference signals (CSI-RSs), because Muruganathan teaches transmission of each configured per-point resource from its corresponding point: (Muruganathan, para [0232] “The S=3 NZP CSI-RS resources denoted as CSI-RS resources 1, 2, and 3 are transmitted from TRPs 1, 2, and 3, respectively.”)
In addition, Muruganathan discloses: and receive the CSI report, the CSI report indicating FD bases for the CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches reception of the reported CSI, in which the selected frequency domain vectors are carried as components of the precoding matrix indicator: (Muruganathan, para [0291] “The UE 1200 receives, from the network node 1202, at least one of the following configurations for channel measurement associated with a CSI reporting configuration”; Muruganathan, para [0256] “In terms of CSI reporting, the above orthogonal FD vectors selected are fed back as part of the i1 component of the PMI (TS 38.214 V16.5.0).”)
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 21, wherein M is based at least in part on an FD-joint codebook for the selected TRPs or TRP groups. Claim 22 is analogous to claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 22, wherein the total quantity of selected FD bases is based at least in part on a union set of all FD basis selection sets for the multiple TRPs or TRP groups. Claim 23 is analogous to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 24, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 21, wherein M is based at least in part on separate codebooks for the selected TRPs or TRP groups. Claim 24 is analogous to claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 25, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 24, wherein the total quantity of selected FD bases is based at least in part on all FD bases for the multiple TRPs or TRP groups. Claim 25 is analogous to claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 26, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 21, wherein the CSI report indicates locations of one or more selection windows for the selected FD bases. Claim 26 is analogous to claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 27, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 26, wherein the one or more selection windows include a first selection window that is associated with a reference TRP or TRP group, and wherein the CSI report includes first bits that indicate a location of the first selection window. Claim 27 is analogous to claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 30, the claim recites: A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising: receiving a configuration of a quantity M of selected frequency domain (FD) bases for channel state information (CSI) reporting that represents a total quantity of selected FD bases across multiple transmit receive points (TRPs) or TRP groups, independent of selected TRPs for a CSI report; selecting FD bases for the CSI report based at least in part on M; and transmitting the CSI report based at least in part on measurements of one or more CSI reference signals (CSI-RSs), using the FD bases for the CSI report. Claim 30 is analogous to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claims 3, 14, 19 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muruganathan (US 2024/0364400 A1) in view of Rahman (US 2022/0360308 A1).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, although Muruganathan teaches selection of the frequency domain vectors without forming any intermediate window whenever the reporting subband count stands on one side of a predefined value, the value being given only by way of example: (Muruganathan, para [0262], [0224]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose that the predefined value is set such that the window-free selection applies when the quantity of subbands for CSI reporting is greater than nineteen.
Nonetheless, Muruganathan in view of Rahman discloses The UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, to select the FD bases for the CSI report, are configured to select the FD bases for the CSI report without a selection window if a quantity of subbands for CSI reporting is greater than 19 because Rahman teaches the same two alternative modes — free selection of the M vectors from the whole candidate set in one step, or the windowed two-step selection — with the boundary between them stated as one example of a configurable value rather than as a fixed rule (Rahman, para [0164], “A UE can be configured to report M FD basis vectors in one-step from N3 basis vectors freely (independently) for each layer”; Rahman, para [0167], “In one example, one-step method is used when N3 ≤ 19 and two-step method is used when N3 > 19.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set the value that governs window-free selection above nineteen, so that the UE of Muruganathan selects without a window when the quantity of subbands for CSI reporting is greater than nineteen. Both references disclose the two modes as alternatives and both present the numeric boundary only as an example (“e.g., N3≤19”; “In one example”), which identifies it as a configurable design parameter rather than a fixed limit. Choosing between a finite number of identified, predictable solutions in that way is within the skill of the art, and selecting a value for a parameter the prior art discloses as configurable is routine optimization. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007); MPEP 2143(E) and 2144.05(II). The predictable result is the window-free selection the references themselves describe.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 13, although Muruganathan teaches conditioning of the selection window on a comparison of the number of PMI subbands against a value of nineteen, the number of PMI subbands being defined as the number of CQI subbands multiplied by a configured scaling factor: (Muruganathan, para [0255], [0258]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose the values that the scaling factor takes, and hence that the threshold expressed as a quantity of subbands is less than nineteen.
Yet, Muruganathan in view of Rahman discloses The UE of claim 13, wherein the threshold quantity is less than 19 because Rahman teaches the same relation between the two subband counts with the scaling factor expressly configured from a set that includes two, so that a boundary of nineteen PMI subbands corresponds to a threshold of ten CQI subbands (Rahman, para [0163], “R is higher-layer configured from {1,2} and p is higher-layer configured from {1/4, 1/2}”; Rahman, para [0167], “In one example, one-step method is used when N3 ≤ 19 and two-step method is used when N3 > 19.”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the scaling factor values of Rahman to the subband relation of Muruganathan, yielding a threshold quantity of subbands below nineteen. Muruganathan defines the number of PMI subbands as the number of CQI subbands scaled by R and conditions its window on that count exceeding nineteen; Rahman supplies the values R takes. With R configured to two, the disclosed boundary is reached at ten CQI subbands, a threshold less than nineteen, and the combination is the use of a known parameter value in a known relation to obtain a predictable result. See MPEP 2143(A) and 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 1, although Muruganathan teaches reporting of the point selection in the CSI report itself, with the number of selected per-point resources carried in the first part of the report and the indicators identifying them carried in the second part, and the principle that a quantity determining the payload of the second part is reported in the first part: (Muruganathan, para [0234], [0272]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose that the indication identifying which points were selected is itself carried in the first part of the report.
Yet, Muruganathan in view of Rahman discloses The UE of claim 1, wherein the CSI report indicates the selected TRPs or TRP groups in CSI part 1 because Rahman teaches the first part of the uplink control information carrying the resource indicator that identifies which of several configured measurement resources the report pertains to (Rahman, para [0231], “The part 1 UCI may also include CRI if the UE is configured with more than one CSI-RS resources.”).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to carry the indication of the selected per-point resources of Muruganathan in the first part of the report as Rahman does. Rahman places the resource indicator in the first part precisely when more than one measurement resource is configured, and Muruganathan states the governing principle for that placement, namely that a quantity determining the payload of the second part belongs in the first part. Which points were selected determines how much per-point basis and coefficient information the second part carries, so placing that indication in the fixed-size first part predictably allows the receiver to size and decode the remainder. See MPEP 2143(A) and (B).
Regarding claim 29, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 26, wherein the one or more selection windows are based on a threshold quantity of subbands, and wherein the threshold quantity is less than 19. Claim 29 is analogous to claim 13 and 14 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 10, 11, 12, 16 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muruganathan (US 2024/0364400 A1) in view of Chung (US 2022/0303812 A1).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 9, although Muruganathan teaches association of each selection window with one of the measured points, the correspondence being fixed by a sorting of the resource identifiers: (Muruganathan, para [0259], [0263]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose that the point serving as the reference is the one holding a strongest coefficient across the several points.
Conversely, Muruganathan in view of Chung discloses The UE of claim 9, wherein the reference TRP or TRP group includes a strongest coefficient across the multiple TRPs or TRP groups because Chung teaches reporting of a strongest coefficient indicator among the reported coefficients and use of that strongest coefficient as the anchor against which the remaining frequency domain indices are remapped, so that the element holding the strongest coefficient is the reference for the report (Chung, para [0383], “the UCI part 2 may include information such as a bitmap per layer, an SD/FD basis indicator, LC coefficients per layer (amplitude/phase), and SCI per layer (the strongest coefficient indicator)”; Chung, para [0450], “The predefined specific index may be associated with/related to an index in the frequency domain of a strongest coefficient among the coefficients.”; Chung, para [0450], “the index is remapped so that the index of the strongest coefficient in the frequency domain is located in the first column (i.e., column index = 0)”).
For these reasons, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to designate as the reference point of Muruganathan the point that holds the strongest coefficient, as Chung anchors its report on the strongest coefficient. Muruganathan needs a rule that fixes which measured point the first window belongs to and uses an arbitrary one, the sorted resource identifier; Chung teaches that the strongest coefficient is the natural anchor for the reported quantities and remaps its indices to it. Applying Chung's known anchoring technique to the multi-point windows of Muruganathan is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, and it predictably places the anchor on the dominant channel rather than on an arbitrary identifier. See MPEP 2143(C) and (D).
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 9, although Muruganathan teaches a further window for another of the measured points, whose starting point is reported as its own index over the candidate range: (Muruganathan, para [0259], [0275]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose that the bits reporting the further window's position express an offset with respect to the first window rather than an independent absolute position.
However, Muruganathan in view of Chung discloses The UE of claim 9, wherein the one or more selection windows further include a second selection window that is associated with another TRP or TRP group, and wherein the CSI report further includes second bits that indicate an offset for the second selection window with respect to the first selection window because Chung teaches reporting of frequency domain positions relative to a designated reference position, the remaining indices being remapped so that they are expressed as displacements from the anchor rather than as independent absolute values (Chung, para [0450], “the index is remapped so that the index of the strongest coefficient in the frequency domain is located in the first column (i.e., column index = 0)”; Chung, para [0450], “The predefined specific index may be associated with/related to an index in the frequency domain of a strongest coefficient among the coefficients.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to report the second window's starting point of Muruganathan as a displacement from the first window's starting point, in the manner Chung reports frequency domain positions relative to a designated reference position. Muruganathan already reports one starting index per point and identifies a first point by its sorting rule, and Chung teaches remapping frequency domain indices onto a reference index so that positions are expressed relative to that reference. Applying that known indexing technique to the second window is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, with the predictable benefit that the second position is conveyed in fewer bits because it spans only the separation between the windows rather than the whole candidate range. See MPEP 2143(C) and (D).
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 11, Muruganathan in view of Chung discloses The UE of claim 11, wherein the selected FD bases are selected jointly for the one or more selection windows, as Muruganathan further discloses selection of the vectors for all of the per-point resources through one common window and one reported index that is the same for every layer, so that the bases occupying the windows are chosen in a single joint operation (Muruganathan, para [0258] “the orthogonal FD vectors corresponding to all S NZP CSI-RS resources are selected from a single window of length xM in the frequency domain where x>2”; Muruganathan, para [0258] “the single index i1,5 is layer common (i.e., the same index applies to all transmission layers l)”).
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 1, Muruganathan discloses: The UE of claim 1, wherein the CSI report indicates the FD bases for the CSI report, because Muruganathan teaches feedback of the selected frequency domain vectors as components of the reported precoding matrix indicator: (Muruganathan, para [0256] “In terms of CSI reporting, the above orthogonal FD vectors selected are fed back as part of the i1 component of the PMI (TS 38.214 V16.5.0).”)
Although Muruganathan teaches reporting of a separate frequency domain selection index for each transmission layer and carriage of the per-layer coefficient information in the second part of the report: (Muruganathan, para [0260], [0272]), Muruganathan does not explicitly disclose that the indication of the frequency domain bases is itself carried in the second part of the CSI report for each layer.
However, Muruganathan in view of Chung discloses and wherein the CSI report indicates the FD bases in CSI part 2 for each layer because Chung teaches a second part of the uplink control information that carries the frequency domain basis indicator together with the per-layer bitmap and coefficient information (Chung, para [0383], “the UCI part 2 may include information such as a bitmap per layer, an SD/FD basis indicator, LC coefficients per layer (amplitude/phase), and SCI per layer (the strongest coefficient indicator)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to carry the per-layer frequency domain basis indication of Muruganathan in the second part of a two-part CSI report as taught by Chung. Chung places the frequency domain basis indicator with the per-layer coefficient information in the second part, and Muruganathan independently reports its per-layer coefficient information there; putting the basis indication with the per-layer information whose size it governs keeps the first part at a fixed length, which is what allows the receiver to decode the variable-length second part. See MPEP 2143(A).
Regarding claim 28, the claim recites: The network entity of claim 27, wherein the one or more selection windows further include a second selection window that is associated with another TRP or TRP group, and wherein the CSI report further includes second bits that indicate an offset for the second selection window with respect to the first selection window. Claim 28 is analogous to claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHONGSUH (John) PARK whose telephone number is 408-918-7574. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:30 PST
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, Avellino, Joseph can be reached at 571-272-3905 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.
/CHONGSUH PARK/Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights