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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-12, 14-17 and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Ingale et al. (US 2020/0053607 A1, hereinafter “Ingale”, IDS disclosed by applicant).
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 16, Ingale discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one antenna; at least one radio coupled to the at least one antenna; and a processor coupled to the at least one radio; wherein the UE is configured to perform operations comprising: receiving from a base station a trigger for triggering reporting of CSI during a RACH procedure (see para. 0011, 0017, 0020, 0056, 0069, transmit measurement report associated with target cell to serving cell in response to handover event triggered at the UE. The method includes receiving a handover command comprising at least CS-RS configuration of the target cell); and reporting, to the base station, CSI during the RACH procedure. (see para. 0011, 0017, 0020, 0056, 0069, transmit measurement report associated with target cell to serving cell in response to handover event triggered at the UE. The method includes receiving a handover command comprising at least CS-RS configuration of the target cell).
Regarding claims 2, 12, and 17, Ingale discloses wherein the reporting, to the base station, CSI during the RACH procedure further comprises one of the following: reporting CSI in Msg3 for a 4-step RACH procedure; reporting CSI in MsgA for a 2-step RACH procedure; or reporting CSI in Msg3 during a fallback operation for a 2-step RACH procedure (see para. 00150081, MSG3 of RACH).
Regarding claims 4, and 19, Ingale discloses wherein the operations further comprise: receiving from the base station, PRACH resource configuration in SI or RRC configuration, the PRACH resource configuration includes available PRACH resources from a PRACH resource pool associated with supporting of the reporting of CSI during a RACH procedure (see para. 0073, 0085, PRCH using the dedicated preamble and/or resources); and sending communication to the base station using a PRACH resource from the available PRACH resources (see para. 0101, PRACH resource to Beam-Id).
Regarding claims 5, and 20, Ingale discloses wherein the operations further comprise: receiving, from the base station, CSI report configuration (see para. 0011, receiving CSI-RS configuration), wherein the CSI report configuration comprises at least one of the following: (i) reference signal configuration used for CSI measurement (see para. 0013, CSI-RS resource identifier for measurement), or (ii) report quantity configuration for CSI reporting; and performing CSI measurement and CSI reporting based on the CSI report configuration (see para. 0013-0014, best CSI-RS resources).
Regarding claims 6, and 21, Ingale discloses wherein at least a part of the CSI report configuration is included in one of the following:
(i) System Information (SI) or RRC configuration;
(ii) MAC CE; or
(iii) DCI. (see para. 0067, CSI-RS configuration is provided to UE in the system information).
Regarding claims 7, 22, Ingale discloses wherein a reference signal for CSI measurement is either SSB or CSI-RS (see para. 0081, CSI-resource).
Regarding claim 8, Ingale discloses wherein report quantity configuration for CSI reporting includes at least one of the following:
(i) L1-RSRP;
(ii) L1-SINR; or
(iii) cri-RI-PMI-CQI, cri-RI-LI-PMI-CQI, cri-Rl-il, cri-RI-il-CQI or cri-RI-CQI (see para. 0060, 0081, 0084, CSI-RS RSRP; para. 0070, CSI-RSRQ).
Regarding claim 9, Ingale discloses wherein the UE performs CSI measurement and CSI reporting during the RACH procedure based on timeline constrains, wherein the timeline constrains comprise a first minimum time required for the UE to measure the CSI and generate a CSI report (see para. 0071, 0084, 0094, measurement timing configuration).
Regarding claim 10, Ingale discloses wherein the timeline constrains further comprise a second minimum time required for the UE to finish processing of the trigger for the CSI report (see para. 0066, trigger based on handover command; para. 0071, signal time window).
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 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) 3,13 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingale in view of Zhou et al. (US 2019/0208436 A1, hereinafter “Zhou”).
Regarding claims 3, 13, and 18, Ingale discloses all the subject matter but fails to mention explicitly wherein the trigger is included in one of the following: (i) System Information (SI) or RRC configuration; (ii) MAC CE; or (iii) DCI. However, Zhou from a similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the trigger is included in one of the following: (i) System Information (SI) or RRC configuration; (ii) MAC CE; or (iii) DCI (see para. 0472 and 0493, configuration parameter with CSI trigger index). Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to include Zhou configuration scheme into Ingle configuration scheme. The method can be implemented in a message. The motivation of doing this is to trigger report of one or more CSI.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yang et al. (US 2017/0373741 A1) disclose UE ULDL configuration detects DCI from a serving cell and UE performs CSI reporting triggered by the CSI request (para. 0126).
Cirik et al. (US 2020/0351682 A1) disclose receiving a DCI with CSI request field indicating a trigger state, the wireless device may perform measurement if CSI-RS and reporting according to configuration).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD S ANWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-5641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5 EST.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
MOHAMMAD S. ANWAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/MOHAMMAD S ANWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights