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, IDS -02/28/2025. 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 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 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)(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.
(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 34-40, 43, 44, 47-50 and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by information disclosure-02/28/2025, Kant et al. (US20200052945A1) hereinafter “Kant”.
Regarding Claim 34,
Kant discloses, ‘An apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code; the at least one memory and the computer program code being configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to:
determine a first precoder for an uplink transmission, wherein the uplink transmission comprises user data and/or an uplink reference signal, and at least one second precoder for a peak cancellation signal’ (the communication device in Fig. 7, a base station alternatively user equipment pre-codes PAPR reduction/distortion/clip-noise. Generates signals with desired peak amplitude and pre-codes the generated and a RS by a set of precoders [0057]. Proposed iterative techniques uses PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and frequency selective distortion precoding in Fig. 3 Transmit distortion-free. Generated for each transmitter thus resulting in two/more generated signals within an iteration cycle. In the first iteration, the input signal RS and in next iteration composite signal [0061]. Digital Baseband includes in Fig. 3 illustrates precoding scheme. Codewords [Wingdings font/0xE0] scambling/modulation mapper – Digital BF/Precoding [Wingdings font/0xE0] RE-mapper [Wingdings font/0xE0] iterative technique (PAPR reduction/spectrum shaping/distortion-precoding [Wingdings font/0xE0] OFDM modulation [Wingdings font/0xE0] power amplifier [Wingdings font/0xE0] antenna port. The techinique is performed in the frequency domain before the OFDM modulation or after the OFDM modulator in the time domain [0059]. Selection of precoder as a projection onto the orthogonal complement to the subspace spanned by the data signals' precoders corresponding to the desired signals. Frequency selective precoding based on pseudo-random/cyclic/function of sub-carrier-index in addition to MIMO precoder matrix [0077].);
PNG
media_image1.png
471
687
media_image1.png
Greyscale
And discloses, ‘decide whether to transmit, along with the uplink transmission, the peak cancellation signal using one of the at least one second precoder’ (In Fig. 4B illustrates a decision to perform a distortion-precoding. Based on the decision the method continues in Fig. 4 S20 [0066].);
And discloses, ‘and transmit, depending on said decision, at least the uplink transmission to a wireless network node using the first precoder.’ (transmit-signal S40 in Fig. 4B)
Regarding Claim 35,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
transmit, if it is decided that the peak cancellation signal is to be transmitted with said one of the at least one second precoder, the uplink transmission to the wireless network node using the first precoder and the peak cancellation signal using said one of the at least one second precoder.’ (the composite signal is transmitted in Fig. 4B [0065]. a composite signal is generated per antenna, in step-S40 based on the pre-coded distortions and the ideal transmission signal. It is then determined if further iterations are needed or if the generated composite signal is ready for transmission [0066].)
Regarding Claim 36,
‘The apparatus of claim 35’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the peak cancellation signal is transmitted via a subset of frequency and/or time resources reserved for said user data and/or the uplink reference signal.’ (the communication device pre-codes the signal-distortions in the frequency domain, and add the pre-coded clip-noise to the RS to be transmitted (in either frequency or time domain) [0057].
Regarding Claim 37,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the at least one second precoder comprises at least two second precoders and the apparatus is further caused to:
select said one of the at least one second precoder for the peak cancellation signal from the at least two second precoders.’ (the communication device pre-codes the signal-distortion with a set of precoders [0057]; determined the signal-distortion are pre-coded using a set of precoders which are selected as a function of precoder weights [0062].)
Regarding Claim 38,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
transmit, if it is decided that the peak cancellation signal is not to be transmitted using any of the at least one second precoder, the uplink transmission to the wireless network node without transmitting the peak cancellation signal’ (In Fig. 4B illustrates the determination of distorted signal; if no precoding distortion is performed, then generation of composite signal in S40 is trivial and transmitted [0066].)
Regarding Claim 39,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein said decision is performed separately for each symbol, wherein the symbol is a Cyclic Prefix—Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, OFDM, CP-OFDM, symbol, a Discrete Fourier Transform—spread—OFDM, DFT-s-OFDM, symbol or a Known Tail—DFT-s-OFDM, KT-DFT-s-OFDM, symbol.’ (determination signal-distortion includes a difference between the RS and the distorted [0072]. Determined in the frequency-domain for each OFDM symbol. Computing distortions in frequency-domain by transforming the differences between time-domain composite signal and time-domain RS to the frequency domain using an FFT. Obtaining distortion in frequency domain by determining the difference between the generated/composite signals and the reference signal that are transformed to the frequency domain using FFT [0073-0075]. Frequency selective precoding based on cyclic [0077]. Reduction PAPR algorithm [0114]. Perform OFDM symbol modulation and CP-addition [0124-0125]. )
Regarding Claim 40,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
receive, from the wireless network node, information about a first transmission rank and a second transmission rank, wherein the first transmission rank is for transmitting the uplink transmission without the peak cancellation signal and the second transmission rank is for transmitting the uplink transmission with the peak cancellation signal’ (distortion-scaling factor can be iteration and transmit antenna specific [0143]. A composite signal generated per antenna and based on pre-coded-distortion S40 in Fig. 4B. If no pre-coding-distortion is performed then the composite signal S40 equals to the signal generates S14 [0066, 0069]. The device determines whether a distortion precoding with spectrum shaping is required/not [0069]. MIMO precoder maps-Nss -layers to the NTx antenna [0086] and illustrated in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. Each precoding matrices includes precoder index and layers/ranks [0098]);
And discloses, ‘and transmit, depending on said decision, the uplink transmission to the wireless network node using the first transmission rank or the second transmission rank.’ (Transmitted [0065] In Fig. 4. )
Regarding Claim 43,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
receive from the wireless network node a limit for an error vector magnitude, power level and/or power density associated with the at least one second precoder; wherein
decide whether to transmit the peak cancellation signal using said one of the at least one second precoder is based on the limit for the error vector magnitude, power level and/or power density of each of the at least one second precoder.’ (low distortion level for reduction of PAPR and spectrum shaping [0182-0183]. Reduces SNR and distortions (EVM), PAPR and spectral emissions [0003, 0006, 0053].)
Regarding Claim 44,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein deciding whether to transmit the peak cancellation signal using said one of the at least one second precoder is based on at least one of:
an evaluation of an efficiency of said one of the at least one second precoder ‘(Disclosure, iterative technique includes PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping, frequency-selective distortion precoding in Fig. 3. And, in Fig. 4 illustrates to perform the distortion precoding iterative cycle.);
And discloses, ‘spatial of suitability said one of the at least one second precoder; or channel measurements of the apparatus.’ (spatial precoding distortion [0059]. MIMO precoder that maps the Nss layers (spatial layers) to the NTx antennas [0086].)
Regarding Claim 47,
‘The apparatus of claim 34, wherein a transmission rank of the first precoder is smaller than a number of antenna ports of the user equipment, wherein said antenna ports are configured for uplink transmissions.’ (disclosure include 8 layers and 32 antenna ports [0098].)
Regarding Claim 48,
‘The apparatus of claim 34, wherein the uplink transmission is a CP-OFDM transmission, a DFT-s-OFDM transmission or a KT-DFT-s-OFDM, transmission.’ (In Fig.3, 5 and 6 includes the OFDM includes CP. And matrix includes DFT[0099].)
Regarding Claim 49,
Similar to Claim 34 disclosed above, ‘An apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code;
the at least one memory and the computer program code being configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to:
determine, for a user equipment, a first precoder for an uplink transmission, wherein the uplink transmission comprises user data and/or an uplink reference signal, and at least one second precoder for a peak cancellation signal;
and receive an uplink transmission from the user equipment in accordance with at least the first precoder.’
Regarding Claim 50,
Similar to Claim 35 disclosed above, ‘The apparatus of claim 49, wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
receive the uplink transmission from the user equipment in accordance with the first precoder and the peak cancellation signal in accordance with one of the at least one second precoder.’
Regarding Claim 53,
Similar to Claim 34 disclosed above, ‘A method, comprising:
determining a first precoder for an uplink transmission, wherein the uplink transmission comprises user data and/or an uplink reference signal, and at least one second precoder for a peak cancellation signal;
deciding whether to transmit, along with the uplink transmission, the peak cancellation signal using one of the at least one second precoder; and
transmitting, depending on said decision, at least the uplink transmission to a wireless network node using the first precoder.’
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
he 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:
• Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
• Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
• Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
• 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.
Claims 41, 45, 51 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kant et al. in view of Hao et al. (US20200186303A1) hereinafter “Hao”.
Regarding Claim 41,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And discloses, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
receive from the wireless network node indicators of the first precoder and the at least one second precoder ‘
‘or receive from the wireless network node an indicator of the first precoder and derive the at least one second precoder from the indicator of the first precoder’.
Hao in the relevant art discloses, the UE receives from the BS, a configuration of one/more RS resource sets to apply the first precoding and the second precoding [0007].
Therefore, a person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention would have recognized that the disclosure of Kant and to include with that of Hao to come up with the claim invention
Kant motive to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and distortion-precoding in Fig. 3 uses set of precoders [0057, 0062]. Communication device is configured to generate signal and to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and to provide/determine distorted-signal and generate the composite signal, precoding is enabled to mitigate the distortion [0014]. Hao complements the motive to include the precoder configuration received from the BS [0007]. Precoder SRS provide PAPR [0086].
Regarding Claim 51,
Similar to Claim 41 disclosed above, ‘The apparatus of claim 49, wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
transmit to the user equipment indicators of the first precoder and the at least one second precoder; or
transmit to the user equipment an indicator of the first precoder, wherein the at least one second precoder is to be derived from the indicator of the first precoder.’
Regarding Claim 45,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And didn’t disclose, ‘wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
transmit, to the wireless network node, a notification about said one of the at least one second precoder; and/or
transmit, to the wireless network node, a notification about whether the apparatus has used the at least one second precoder.’
Hao in the relevant art discloses, transmit the pre-coded SRS to the BS [0092]. transmit using the indicated precoder information [0005] and in Fig. 5.
Therefore, a person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claim invention would have recognized that the disclosure of Kant and to include
with that of Hao to come up with the claim invention,
Kant motive to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and distortion-precoding in Fig. 3 uses set of precoders [0057, 0062]. Communication device is configured to generate signal and to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and to provide/determine distorted-signal and generate the composite signal, precoding is enabled to mitigate the distortion [0014]. Hao complements the motive to include the precoder information Hao [0005].
Regarding Claim 52,
Similar to Claim 45 disclosed above, ‘The apparatus of claim 49, wherein the apparatus is further caused to:
receive from the user equipment a notification about said one of the at least one second precoder;
and/or receive from the user equipment a notification about whether the user equipment has used the at least one second precoder.’
Claims 42, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Kant et al. in view of Shaittil et al. (US11646929-B1) hereinafter “Shattil”.
Regarding Claim 42,
‘The apparatus of claim 34’ (disclosed above),
And didn’t disclose, ‘wherein said indicators are received in an uplink scheduling grant.’ Shattil in the relevant art disclose, OFDM schedule processor in Fig. 4B, assigns UL-sub-carrier/symbols scheduling to the UE for uplink transmission Col. 21 [0006-0008], Col. 20 [0026-0028, 0033] and Fig. 5B.
Therefore, a person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claim invention would have recognized that the disclosure of Kant and to include
with that of Shattil to come up with the claim invention,
Communication device is configured to generate signal and to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and to provide/determine distorted-signal and generate the composite signal, precoding is enabled to mitigate the distortion [0014, 0057, 0052]. Shattil complements the configuration to use the schedule OFDM processor.
Regarding Claim 46,
‘The apparatus of claim 34, wherein cross-correlation between the first precoder and each of the at least one second precoder is substantially zero.’
Shattil in the relevant art discloses, spread-sequence of UL-sub-carriers selects a set of orthogonal sequences/functions (signals/sequences) have zero cross-correlation that have zero cross-correlation. And, the zero-cross-correlation occurs if the product of two signals summed over a period of time (or sequence length) is zero Col. 21 [0008, 0017-0021]. Generates multiple precoding matrices for at least one tone such that each precoding matrix achieves a predetermined minimum cross correlation between subspace channels. cross correlation can be determined based on spatial subchannel Col. 47 [0058-0060].
Therefore, a person in the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claim invention would have recognized that the disclosure of Kant and to include
with that of Hao to come up with the claim invention,
Kant motive to perform PAPR reduction, spectrum shaping and distortion-precoding in Fig. 3 uses set of precoders [0057, 0062]. Generates precoding matrix includes precoder index to distortion precoding and layer/ranks [0098], space orthogonal to space spanned [0095, 0096, 0098], and a set of precoders is determined that is sub-space spanned by the precoder. A set of suitable precoder indices that has large (sub-space) distance d(W[k]), Wp), relative to a given/user-defined threshold between the precoder [0100-0101]. Shattil complements the motive while generates multiple precoding matrices and each precoding matrix achieves a predetermined minimum cross correlation between subspace channels. cross correlation can be determined based on spatial subchannel Col. 47 [0058-0060]. This would improve efficiency of transmission mitigate the distortion Kant [0013].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure:
Harrision et al. (US20210359733A1) “Variable Coherence Adaptive Antenna Array”.
Huang et al. (US20210399773A1) “Uplink transmission method, uplink transmission scheduling method, and device”. the signal of the second antenna is only the signal of the first antenna plus a delay. Therefore, the second antenna can meet the low peak to average power ratio (PAPR) of discrete Fourier transform-spread-OFDM (DFT-S-OFDM) [0070].
Saeid et al. (US-20210359731-A1), “Precoding techniques for wireless communications”.
Alexandros et al. (US 20210136566 A1) “Antenna correlation feedback for partial reciprocity”.
Mao et al. (US12206542B2) “Signal transmission method and apparatus”. the transmitting end separately performs first processing on the first symbol and the second symbol to obtain a DFT-s-OFDM signal, and transmits, disclosure claim 18. Cyclic prefix in Fig. 2. Perform inverse fast Fourier transform and cyclic prefix (CP) addition on a frequency domain signal obtained through frequency domain resource mapping, to obtain the DFT-s-OFDM signal or the OFDM signal.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Syed Ahmed whose telephone number is (703)-756-5308. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday-Friday 9am-6pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Faruk Hamza can be reached on (571) 272-7969. 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.
/S.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights