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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-20 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, are being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
b. This is a first action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 09/27/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/31/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: grammatical error. Claim 5 recites the limitations “… a second device comprises: The first device indicates…” (underlined emphasis). Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al. US Pub 2024/0114376, claiming domestic priority 2021-06-28 (hereinafter “Luo”), and in view of Sebire et al. US Pub 2011/0039542 (hereinafter “Sebire”).
Regarding claim 1
Luo discloses an information indication method (“FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a sensing procedure according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.” [0006]), comprising:
indicating, by a first device (i.e. “sensing initiator” in Fig. 48), first information to a second device (i.e. “target device” in Fig. 48), wherein the first information (step 310 in Fig. 48) is used to indicate a sensing measurement result (“A second device receives first information sent by a first device, where the first information includes measurement information of at least one sensing receiver;” [0826]; see Fig. 48); and
the sensing measurement result is a measurement result obtained by performing sensing measurement on a target signal received by the first device (“A method for wireless communication, including: sending, by a first device, first information to a second device, where the first information includes measurement information of at least one sensing receiver, and a configuration factor of the measurement information includes at least one of: a sensing receiver, a burst, a burst group, or a sensing session; the measurement information includes at least one of: a measurement threshold, a measurement type, a method of computing the measurement threshold, target indication information, or target bitmap information; the measurement threshold is used for determining whether a sensing result is reported, the target indication information indicates whether a measurement is a measurement threshold-based measurement, and the target bitmap information indicates a sensing receiver using the measurement information.” [Abstract]).
Luo does not specifically teach wherein the first information is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result.
In an analogous art, Sebire discloses wherein the first information (i.e. “Measurement Results information element”) is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result (“The details of the Measurement Results information elements are provided in Table 10.5.2.20.1, and are as follows:” [0048])
PNG
media_image1.png
64
245
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Luo’s method for performing sensing measurements to include Sebire’s method for reporting measurement results in order to implement enhanced measurement reporting according to 3GPP TS 36.104 V8.1.0 (2008-03) Technical Specification (Sebire [0039-0040]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Sebire’s method for reporting measurement results into Luo’s method for performing sensing measurements since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 2
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Sebire further discloses wherein the first information (i.e. “Measurement Results information element”) comprises an indication bit (i.e. “Bit 7”), and the indication bit is at least one bit and is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result (“The details of the Measurement Results information elements are provided in Table 10.5.2.20.1, and are as follows:” [0048]):
PNG
media_image1.png
64
245
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 2,
Sebire further discloses wherein the indication bit is one bit (i.e. “Bit 7”), a first value of the bit indicates that the sensing measurement result is valid (Bit 7 = 0), and a second value of the bit indicates that the sensing measurement result is invalid (Bit 7 = 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
64
245
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 2,
Sebire further discloses in Table 10.5.2.20.1 on page 2 wherein the indication bit is m bits, m is an integer greater than 1, and the m bits indicate a validity level of the sensing measurement result (“However, if the above-described black list approach is adopted for reporting EUTRAN cell measurements the 18 bits (i.e. m bits) information as discussed above would need to be carried by the 12 bits of available space (from the RXLEV and BSIC fields) for each report in the measurement results IE (see again FIG. 1) used in the MEASUREMENT REPORT message.” [0051]).
Regarding claim 5
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Sebire further discloses wherein the indicating, by a first device, validity of a sensing measurement result to a second device comprises:
The first device indicates the validity of the sensing measurement result to the second device through a discontinuous transmission (DTX).
PNG
media_image2.png
47
118
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following:
Luo further discloses a reason for invalidity of the sensing measurement result (“The reason code field indicates that a measurement type indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported, or the reason code field indicates that a method of computing a threshold indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported, or the reason code field indicates that a measurement threshold indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported.” [0259-0260]).
Regarding claim 8
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the reason for the invalidity of the sensing measurement result comprises at least one of the following:
Luo further discloses quality of the target signal detected by the first device does not meet a threshold requirement (“The amount of data of the sensing measurement result is usually large, for example, the amount of the CSI data of one measurement may reach 4K-40K bits. In order to reduce the network load caused by reporting the sensing measurement result, a measurement threshold may be set. When the change between the current sensing measurement result and the last sensing measurement result is less than the measurement threshold, the sensing receiver reports the sensing measurement result; otherwise, the sensing receiver does not report the sensing measurement result.” [0104]);
Regarding claim 9
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following:
Luo further discloses identification information of the target signal associated with the sensing measurement result (“the sensing receiver list field indicates that the common information field includes none of IDs of sensing receivers, or that the common information field includes IDs of one or more sensing receivers;” [0337]);
identification information of a sensing measurement (“The sensing initiator may set multiple sets of measurement parameters, and one set of measurement parameters (that is identified by a measurement setup ID, which may be equivalent to the burst group) can be applied to multiple measurements (each measurement is identified by a measurement instance ID, which may be equivalent to the burst).” [0105]); or
the sensing measurement result (“In some embodiments, the action field of the first frame includes a common information field including at least one of: a sensing schedule information field, a sensing receiver list field, a number-of-burst-information field, or M measurement information fields. The sensing schedule information field indicates scheduling information for setting up a sensing session; each of the M measurement information fields indicates the measurement information;” [0207]).
Regarding claim 10
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Sebire further discloses wherein in a case that the sensing measurement result is valid, indicating, by the first device, the first information (“The details of the Measurement Results information elements are provided in Table 10.5.2.20.” [0048]) to the second device;
in a case that the first information indicates that the sensing measurement result is valid, the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following: the sensing measurement result .
PNG
media_image3.png
291
511
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Luo further discloses wherein in a case that the first information indicates that the sensing measurement result is invalid, the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following:
a reason for invalidity of the sensing measurement result (“The reason code field indicates that a measurement type indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported, or the reason code field indicates that a method of computing a threshold indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported, or the reason code field indicates that a measurement threshold indicated in the sensing setup request is not supported.” [0259-0260]); or
a parameter configuration of the target signal (“The sensing initiator may set multiple sets of measurement parameters, and one set of measurement parameters (that is identified by a measurement setup ID, which may be equivalent to the burst group) can be applied to multiple measurements (each measurement is identified by a measurement instance ID, which may be equivalent to the burst).” [0105]); or
Regarding claim 11
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein before the indicating, by a first device, first information to a second device, the method further comprises:
Luo further discloses receiving, by the first device, second information sent by the second device, wherein the second information is used to indicate at least one of the following:
a criterion for determining the validity of the sensing measurement result (“The sensing initiator may set multiple sets of measurement parameters, and one set of measurement parameters (that is identified by a measurement setup ID, which may be equivalent to the burst group) can be applied to multiple measurements (each measurement is identified by a measurement instance ID, which may be equivalent to the burst).” [0105]);
a sensing requirement (“In some embodiments, the common information field further includes an accuracy information field indicating a measurement accuracy requirement for setting up the sensing session. The sensing receiver and/or the sensing transmitter may negotiate the measurement information based on the measurement accuracy requirement for setting up the sensing session indicated by the accuracy information field.” [0215]);
Regarding claim 12
Luo discloses an information obtaining method, comprising:
obtaining, by a second device, first information indicated by a first device, wherein the first information is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result; and
the sensing measurement result is a measurement result obtained by performing sensing measurement on a target signal received by the first device.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 12 are reciprocal to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 1. Therefore method claim 12 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 13
The method according to claim 12, wherein the first information comprises an indication bit, and the indication bit is at least one bit and is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 13 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 2. Therefore method claim 13 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 14
The method according to claim 13, wherein the indication bit is one bit, a first value of the bit indicates that the sensing measurement result is valid, and a second value of the bit indicates that the sensing measurement result is invalid.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 14 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 3. Therefore method claim 14 corresponds to method claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
Regarding claim 15
The method according to claim 13, wherein the indication bit is m bits, m is an integer greater than 1, and the m bits indicate a validity level of the sensing measurement result.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 15 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 4. Therefore method claim 15 corresponds to method claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 4 rejection above.
Regarding claim 17
The method according to claim 12, wherein the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following:
a reason for invalidity of the sensing measurement result; or
a parameter configuration of the target signal; or,
wherein the first information is further used to indicate at least one of the following:
identification information of the target signal associated with the sensing measurement result;
identification information of a sensing measurement; or
the sensing measurement result.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 17 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claims 7 and 9. Therefore method claim 17 corresponds to method claims 7 and 9 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claims 7 and 9 rejections above.
Regarding claim 18
The method according to claim 12, wherein before the obtaining, by a second device, first information indicated by a first device, the method further comprises:
sending, by the second device, second information to the first device, wherein the second information is used to indicate at least one of the following:
whether feedback on the validity of the sensing measurement result is needed;
a rule for feedback on the validity of the sensing measurement result;
a criterion for determining the validity of the sensing measurement result;
a sensing measurement item;
a sensing requirement; or
a sensing service; or,
wherein before the obtaining, by a second device, first information indicated by a first device, the method further comprises:
sending, by the second device, third information to the first device, wherein the third information is used to indicate at least one of the following:
indication information that indicates whether sensing measurement is allowed to be performed based on a communication data signal;
configuration information of a communication data signal obtained by performing sensing measurement; or
sensing quality of service (QoS) information.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 18 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claim 11. Therefore method claim 18 corresponds to method claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 11 rejection above.
Regarding claim 19
Luo discloses a communication device (“as shown in FIG. 2, the STA1 may be the sensing initiator” [0087]), wherein the communication device is a first device (i.e. “sensing initiator” in Fig. 2) and comprises a processor (“processor 810” in Fig. 55; [0786]) and a memory (“memory 820” in Fig. 55; [0786]), the memory stores a program or an instruction that can be run on the processor, wherein the program or the instruction, when executed by the processor, causes the communication device to perform:
indicating first information to a second device, wherein the first information is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result; and
the sensing measurement result is a measurement result obtained by performing sensing measurement on a target signal received by the first device.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 19 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 19 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 20
Luo discloses a communication device (“the STA2 may be the sensing transmitter.” [0087]), wherein the communication device is a second device (i.e. “target device” in Fig. 48) and comprises a processor (“processor 810” in Fig. 55; [0786]) and a memory (“memory 820” in Fig. 55; [0786]), the memory stores a program or an instruction that can be run on the processor, and the program or the instruction is executed by the processor to implement the steps of the information obtaining method according to claim 12.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 20 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 12. Therefore apparatus claim 20 corresponds to method claim 12 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 12 rejection above.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo, in view of Sebire, and further in view of You et al. US Pub 2023/0015475, claiming domestic priority 2021-03-26 (hereinafter “You”).
Regarding claim 6
Luo, as modified by Sebire, previously discloses the method according to claim 5,
Luo and Sebire do not specifically teach wherein in a case that the sensing measurement result is invalid, skipping sending, by the first device, a signal on a first feedback resource that is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result, so as to indicate through a DTX that the sensing measurement result is invalid to the second device.
In an analogous art, You discloses wherein in a case that the sensing measurement result is invalid, skipping sending, by the first device (i.e. “terminal device”), a signal on a first feedback resource (e.g. “HARQ feedback”) that is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result, so as to indicate through a DTX (as taught by Sebire) that the sensing measurement result is invalid (“if there is no downlink resource configured by the network device for the terminal device, the terminal device skips performing downlink measurement, skips receiving the downlink data, skips sending the HARQ feedback corresponding to the downlink data, or determines that the downlink measurement result is invalid.” [0100]) to the second device (e.g. “network device”).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Luo’s method for performing sensing measurements, as modified by Sebire, to include You’s method for skipping invalid measurements report, in order to improve measurement efficiency and accuracy of a measurement result (You [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate You’s method for skipping invalid measurements report into Luo’s method for performing sensing measurements since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 16
The method according to claim 12, wherein the obtaining, by a second device, first information indicated by a first device comprises:
obtaining, by the second device, the first information through a discontinuous transmission (DTX) of the first device;
wherein in a case that the sensing measurement result is invalid, skipping detecting, by the second device, a signal sent by the first device on a first feedback resource that is used to indicate validity of a sensing measurement result, so as to determine through the DTX that the sensing measurement result is invalid.
The scope and subject matter of method claim 16 are similar to the scope and subject matter as claimed in method claims 5 and 6. Therefore method claim 16 corresponds to method claims 5 and 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claims 5 and 6 rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
