DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the pending claims, 1-21, received 24 October 2024. Accordingly, the detailed action of claims 1-21 is as follows:
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 statements (IDS) submitted on 01/21/2025, 11/23/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “a best beam and at least a second best beam of the set of antenna panels….where the second best beam is the best beam from the set of antenna panels excluding an antenna panel of the best beam.” However, it is unclear whether the best beam and second best beam are considered the highest or lowest regarding a particular feature of the beam and what constitutes the best or what the best is relative to.
In the interest of advancing prosecution, the examiner understands the best beam and at least second best beam of the set of antenna panels to indicate a first beam and at least a second beam of the set of antenna panels where the second best beam is the beam from the set of antenna panels excluding an antenna panel of the first beam.
Regarding the dependent claims, the claims depend on independent 13 such that the dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the independent claim 3 and do not cure the deficiencies of the independent claim.
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.
Claims 1-2, 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan (US 20240430810 A1,hereafter referred to as Fan) in view of Arogyaswami (US 20140307704 A1, hereafter referred to as Arogyaswami).
Regarding claim 1, Fan teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
a transceiver (Fan [0036; Fig 8-801]); a set of antenna panels (Fan [0059-0060]); at least one memory (Fan [0036; Fig 8-803]); and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Fan [0036; Fig 8-802]) and configured to cause the UE to:
transmit a first signal from the transceiver via a first antenna panel of the set of antenna panels to a first transmission-reception point (TRP) in a first transmission direction (Fan [0265 and 0207-0209] teaches performing simultaneous transmission by using a plurality of panels ([0009 and 0059-0060]) to a network device in a particular direction [0061]);
transmit a second signal from the transceiver via at least a second antenna panel of the set of antenna panels to a second TRP in a second transmission direction (Fan [0265 and 0207-0209] teaches performing simultaneous transmission by using a plurality of panels ([0009 and 0059-0060]) to a network device in a particular direction [0061]).
While Fan, teaches determining EIRP, Fan does not explicitly teach limit interference between the first antenna panel and the second antenna panel, the interference by the first antenna panel limited based at least in part on effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) from the first antenna panel in the second transmission direction toward the second TRP, and the interference by the second antenna panel limited based at least in part on the EIRP from the second antenna panel in the first transmission direction toward the first TRP.
Arogyaswami, in an analogous art, teaches limit interference between the first antenna panel and the second antenna panel (Arogyaswami [0027-0028] teaches managing the EIRP to reduce interference between data streams [0021]), the interference by the first antenna panel limited based at least in part on effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) from the first antenna panel in the second transmission direction toward the second TRP (Arogyaswami [0006] teaches the EIRP impacts the interference of the data stream, to other data streams and associated direction, in the direction the beam containing the data stream is focused), and the interference by the second antenna panel limited based at least in part on the EIRP from the second antenna panel in the first transmission direction toward the first TRP (Arogyaswami [0006] teaches the EIRP impacts the interference of the data stream, to other data streams and associated direction, in the direction the beam containing the data stream is focused).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Fan in view of Arogyaswami in order to configure the EIRP of data streams or beams in a direction from the plurality of antenna panels, as taught by Fan, be used to limit interference between the first antenna panel and the second antenna panel, the interference by the first antenna panel limited based at least in part on effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP), and the interference by the second antenna panel limited, as taught by Arogyaswami.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to adjust the EIRP constraint to gain higher system capacity, larger range, and reduced interference (Arogyaswami [0019]).
Regarding claim 2, Fan-Arogyaswami teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Fan-Arogyaswami teaches the UE wherein an operability requirement of the UE comprises multi-panel transmission from the first antenna panel and the second antenna panel in wireless communication with the respective first and second TRPs based at least in part on a percentage of a cumulative distribution of the EIRP within a limit on the interference from the first antenna panel in the second transmission direction toward the second TRP, and from the second antenna panel in the first transmission direction toward the first TRP (Fan [0308] teaches a sum of actual radiated powers corresponding to the at least two second maximum transmit power of the simultaneous transmission of the UE are required to be less than or equal to a second threshold or a sum of peak EIRPs corresponding to the at least two second maximum transmit powers of the simultaneous transmission of the UE).
Regarding claim 21, it does not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claim 1.
Therefore, claim 21 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 1.
Claims 13-16, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al (US 20190181942 A1, hereafter referred to as Tang) in view of Fan (US 20240430810 A1, hereafter referred to as Fan).
Regarding claim 13, Tang teaches a user
equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
a transceiver (Tang [Fig 3-330, 335]); a set of antennas (Tang [Fig 3-335]);
at least one memory (Tang [Fig 3-305]); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Tang [0053]) and configured to cause the UE to transmit a signal from the transceiver via a best beam and at least a second-best beam of the set of antenna panels (Tang [0087] teaches the wireless device communicates using a second set of antennas wherein the second set of antennas is resultant from a change in the set of antennas that offer the best communication characteristics [0061] including a highest TPR [0108] wherein one or more antennas are used for transmission [0067]), a signal transmission coverage based at least in part on a sum of effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) of the best beam and of the second-best beam (Tang [0086] teaches the selection of a set of antenna is based on the sum of total radiated power of the transmission antennas) where the second-best beam is the best beam from the set of antenna panels excluding an antenna panel of the best beam (Tang [0061] teaches selection of antennas which offer the best transmission characteristics and highest TRP [0108]).
However, Tang does not explicitly teach the set of antennas as antenna panels.
Fan, in an analogous art, teaches the set of antennas as antenna panels (Fan [0059]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tang in view of Fan in order to configure the antennas, as taught by Tang, to include antenna panels, as taught by Fan.
KSR rationale B, simple substitution of one known element (antennas as taught by Tang) for another known element (antenna panels as taught by Fan) in order to yield predictable results (MIMO transmission using transceivers) supports the conclusion of obviousness.
Regarding claim 14, Tang-Fan teaches the limitations of claim 13, as rejected above.
Additionally, Tang-Fan teaches the UE wherein an operability requirement of the UE comprises multi-panel transmission from the set of antenna panels in terms of a percentage of a cumulative distribution of the sum of the EIRP received from the best beam and the second-best beam (Fan [0308] teaches a sum of actual radiated powers corresponding to the at least two second maximum transmit power of the simultaneous transmission of the UE are required to be less than or equal to a second threshold or a sum of peak EIRPs corresponding to the at least two second maximum transmit powers of the simultaneous transmission of the UE).
Regarding claim 15, Tang-Fan teaches the limitations of claim 13, as rejected above.
Additionally, Tang-Fan teaches the UE wherein the signal is transmitted from two best transmission antenna panels of the set of antenna panels based at least in part on a transmission direction to a transmission- reception point (TRP) relative to the UE, the best beam and the second-best beam associated with the two best transmission antenna panels (Fan [0059] teaches beamforming in which an beam is generated pointing to different directions, such that the at least one panel faces the network device and the terminal performs data transmission with the network device [0060] and an EIRP in a given direction is associated [0062]).
Regarding claim 16, Tang-Fan teaches the limitations of claim 13, as rejected above.
Additionally, Tang-Fan teaches the UE wherein coverage reliability of the UE is based at least in part on the second-best beam being the best beam from a first antenna panel of the set of antenna panels being transmitted from other than a second antenna panel corresponding to the best beam (Tang [0061] teaches a set of antennas that offer the best communication characteristics [0061] including a highest TPR [0108] wherein one or more antennas are used for transmission [0067]), the coverage reliability mitigating the best beam being blocked for signal transmission (Tang [0062] teaches communication conditions including one antenna having a relatively clear path and another having a relatively obstructed path are conditions used to adaptively select the set of antennas).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-12 allowed.
Claim 3-6, 17-20 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.
Myung et al (US 20230051723 A1);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEAN TOKUTA whose telephone number is (571)272-5145. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 630-430.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 5712727952. 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.
SHEAN TOKUTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2446
/SHEAN TOKUTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights