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 .
Priority
This application is claiming the benefit of provisional application No. 63/586455 filed 09/29/2023 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), which is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/14/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 35 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0157] is objected to. The paragraph states that “FIG. 8 illustrates base station operations,” but the paragraph describes FIG. 10. The cross-reference should be to FIG. 10. FIG. 8 is already described at [0145] as a UE-side method.
Abstract, [0018], [0019], [0020] are objected to for the following informality: the phrase “a second RS in a second frequency range of a second frequency range” should be “a second RS in a second frequency of a second frequency range.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 10, and 19 are objected to for the following informality: the phrase “a second RS in a second frequency range of a second frequency range” should be “a second RS in a second frequency of a second frequency range.” Claim 3 correctly refers to this as “the second frequency of the first frequency range.”
Claims 5 and 14 are objected to for the following informalities: the phrase “the second frequency range is great than 24 GHz” should read “greater than,” and “less than 7 GHZ” should read “7 GHz.”
Claim 19 is objected to for the following informality: the phrase “based on the second measurements” should be “based on second measurements”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
Claims 1–5, 7, 9, 10–14, 16, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2021/0392516 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 10, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method performed by a user equipment (UE). Claim 1 (UE method) and Claim 10 (UE apparatus) recite substantively identical functional steps, Claim 10 additionally reciting a transceiver and a processor configured to perform those steps via the transceiver.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: A method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: ([0108]: “Based on the configuration information received from the base station, the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal and reports the measurements to the base station”; [0117]: “method 900 may be performed by a first network node (e.g., any of the UEs … described herein)”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from a base station, a first reference signal (RS) in a first frequency of a first frequency range ([0108]: “The base station then transmits the downlink sensing signal in the second carrier frequency … the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal”; [0106]: “The coarse location 830 of the target object 806 … can be estimated based on the sensing signals transmitted in the FR1 carrier frequency”). The downlink sensing signal in the second carrier frequency “F2,” which is an FR1 carrier frequency, is the first RS in a first frequency of a first frequency range received by the UE.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: performing first measurements on the first RS ([0108]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to the base station, a first sensing report based on the first measurements ([0108]: “reports the measurements to the base station. The base station detects the location of any target objects based on the reported measurements”; [0104]: “The UE or the base station may report the coarse detection estimation results”). The UE’s report of its coarse-stage measurements/estimation results is the first sensing report based on the first measurements.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from the base station, a second RS in a second frequency range of a second frequency range ([0109]: “The base station then transmits the downlink sensing signal in the third carrier frequency towards the candidate region determined in the first stage … the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal”; [0107]: “the third carrier frequency is an FR2 carrier frequency”). The downlink sensing signal in the third carrier frequency “F3,” which is an FR2 carrier frequency, is the second RS received by the UE in a second frequency range.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: performing second measurements on the second RS; and ([0109]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to the base station, a second sensing report based on the second measurements. ([0109]: “reports the measurements to the base station. The base station refines the estimated location of any target objects based on the reported measurements”). The UE’s report of its fine-stage measurements is the second sensing report based on the second measurements.
PNG
media_image1.png
690
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the additional structure of Claim 10:
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: A user equipment (UE), comprising: a transceiver (Fig. 3A).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: a processor configured to: perform the receive/measure/transmit operations recited in Claim 10 (Fig. 3A).
Claim 10 is therefore anticipated for the reasons given for Claim 1, with the transceiver and processor supplied by Park et al. (‘516) as set forth above.
PNG
media_image2.png
660
508
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method performed by a base station (Fig. 3B).
Claim 19 recites the complementary base-station method and two additional “determining” steps. It is addressed separately because it is materially distinct from Claims 1 and 10.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: A method performed by a base station, the method comprising: ([0108]: “In a first scenario, the base station transmits the sensing signal … and performs the sensing”; [0117]: “method 900 may be performed by a first network node (e.g., any of the … base stations described herein)”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a first reference signal (RS) in a first frequency of a first frequency range ([0108]: “The base station then transmits the downlink sensing signal in the second carrier frequency”; [0106]: “sensing signals transmitted in the FR1 carrier frequency”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from the UE, a first sensing report based on first measurements performed by the UE ([0108]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal and reports the measurements to the base station”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: determining a coarse location of an object based on the first sensing report ([0108]: “The base station detects the location of any target objects based on the reported measurements”; [0106]: “The coarse location 830 of the target object 806”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to the UE, a second RS in a second frequency range of a second frequency range ([0109]: “The base station then transmits the downlink sensing signal in the third carrier frequency”; [0107]: “the third carrier frequency is an FR2 carrier frequency”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from the UE, a second sensing report based on the second measurements; and ([0109]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal and reports the measurements to the base station”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: determining a fine location of the object based on the second sensing report. ([0109]: “The base station refines the estimated location of any target objects based on the reported measurements”; [0107]: “The fine location 840 of the target object 806”).
Regarding Claims 2 and 11, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from the base station, a first configuration indicating the first frequency of the first frequency range ([0108]: “the base station configures a downlink sensing signal to be transmitted in the second carrier frequency (“F2”) and sends the configuration information to the UE via the anchor carrier frequency (“F1”) … in downlink control information (DCI), MAC control elements (MAC CEs), or RRC signaling”). The configuration information for the second carrier frequency “F2” is the first configuration indicating the first frequency of the first frequency range.
Regarding Claim 11, the claim is substantially the same as claim 2 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 2 is applied.
Regarding Claims 3 and 12, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: receiving, from the base station, a second configuration indicating the second frequency of the second frequency range ([0109]: “the base station configures a downlink sensing signal to be transmitted in the third carrier frequency “‘F3”) and sends the configuration information to the UE via the anchor carrier frequency (“F1”)”). The configuration information for the third carrier frequency “F3” is the second configuration indicating the second frequency of the second frequency range.
Regarding Claim 12, the claim is substantially the same as claim 3 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 3 is applied.
Regarding Claims 4 and 13, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 3 and 12 respectively.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: wherein the second configuration is based on the first sensing report ([0104: “the UE or base station focuses the sensing signal in the third carrier frequency on the candidate area determined in the first stage”; [0109]: “transmits the downlink sensing signal in the third carrier frequency towards the candidate region determined in the first stage”). The candidate area/region of the second stage is determined from the first-stage reported measurements (the first sensing report); accordingly the second-stage (F3) configuration is based on the first sensing report.
Regarding Claim 13, the claim is substantially the same as claim 4 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 4 is applied.
Regarding Claims 5 and 14, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: wherein the first frequency range is less than 7 GHZ, and the second frequency range is great than 24 GHz ([0046]: “FR1 (from 450 to 6000 MHz), FR2 (from 24250 to 52600 MHz)”; [0106]: “sensing signals transmitted in the FR1 carrier frequency”; [0107]: “the third carrier frequency is an FR2 carrier frequency”). FR1 (450–6000 MHz) is less than 7 GHz and FR2 (24250–52600 MHz) is greater than 24 GHz; the coarse first RS is in FR1 and the fine second RS is in FR2.
Regarding Claim 14, the claim is substantially the same as claim 5 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 5 is applied.
Regarding Claims 7 and 16, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
The recite the same additional limitation in “at least one of” form. They are grouped. Under the alternative-limitation rule, only one recited alternative need be taught; the first alternative is relied upon, and the second alternative (“measuring a fine channel state of the first RS”) need not be separately addressed.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses the first alternative: measuring a coarse receive signal strength of the first RS ([0043]: “a stronger received signal strength (e.g., reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR), etc.) of the RF signals received from that direction”; [0108]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal”). Measuring the received signal strength (RSRP/RSRQ/SINR) of the first (FR1, coarse) RS is the recited measuring of a coarse receive signal strength of the first RS.
Regarding Claim 16, the claim is substantially the same as claim 7 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 7 is applied.
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: wherein the first sensing report includes a coarse detection of an object based on the first measurements, and ([0104]: “estimates the coarse range and angle (and optionally velocity) to a target object … The UE or the base station may report the coarse detection estimation results”; [0106]: “The coarse location 830 of the target object 806”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: wherein the second sensing report includes a fine detection of the object based on the second measurements. ([0104]: “The fine range and angle (and optionally velocity) can then be estimated using the sensing signal in the third carrier frequency”; [0107]: “The fine location 840 of the target object 806”). Park’s two-stage procedure reports the coarse detection estimation result as the first sensing report and the fine detection estimation result as the second sensing report.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is substantially the same as claim 9 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 9 is applied.
Regarding Claim 20, Park et al. (‘516) discloses the method of according to Claim 19.
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to the UE, a first configuration indicating the first frequency of the first frequency range; and ([0108]: “the base station configures a downlink sensing signal to be transmitted in the second carrier frequency (‘F2’) and sends the configuration information to the UE via the anchor carrier frequency (‘F1’)”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: transmitting, to the UE, a second configuration indicating the second frequency of the second frequency range, ([0109]: “the base station configures a downlink sensing signal to be transmitted in the third carrier frequency (‘F3’) and sends the configuration information to the UE via the anchor carrier frequency (‘F1’)”).
Park et al. (‘516) discloses: wherein the second configuration is based on the first sensing report. ([0109]: “towards the candidate region determined in the first stage”; [0104]: “focuses the sensing signal in the third carrier frequency on the candidate area determined in the first stage”). The second-stage configuration is directed to the candidate region determined from the first-stage report and is therefore based on the first sensing report.
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.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 2021/0392516 A1) in view of Dwivedi et al. (US 2022/0229143 A1).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, Park et al. (‘516) in view of Dwivedi et al. (‘143) teaches the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
The claims recite the same additional limitation in “one of” form. They are grouped; the analysis for Claim 6 applies equally to Claim 15. Under the alternative-limitation rule only one of the four recited reporting formats need be taught; the fourth alternative — a time domain power delay profile of the first RS — is relied upon, and the remaining alternatives (full CSI; only amplitude component of CSI; only phase component of CSI) need not be separately addressed.
Park et al. (‘516) teaches the parent subject matter of Claim 1 as set forth above, and teaches that the UE measures the first (FR1, coarse) RS and reports the resulting measurements to the base station ([0108]: “the UE receives and measures the downlink sensing signal and reports the measurements to the base station”).
Park et al. (‘516) does not explicitly teach that the first sensing report includes a time domain power delay profile of the first RS; Park reports the first-RS “measurements” generically without specifying that the report comprises a time-domain power delay profile. However, Dwivedi et al. (‘143) teaches: a time domain power delay profile of the first RS ([0026]: “These measurements can include the power delay profile of the multipath channel”; [0042]: “The channel impulse response h(τ) can be determined by the inverse Fourier transform of H(f) … The squared magnitude of h(τ) may be averaged over time to get the average power delay profile (PDP), p(τ)”; [0027]: “the UE may report finer channel impulse response to the network”). Dwivedi et al. (‘143) teaches a UE that derives, from the estimated channel frequency response of the received reference signal, a time-domain channel impulse response and its power delay profile, and reports that time-domain measurement to the network.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the UE’s first sensing report in Park to include a time domain power delay profile of the first RS, as taught by Dwivedi et al. (‘143). One would have been motivated to do so because Dwivedi et al. (‘143) teaches that a power delay profile derived from the channel impulse response conveys how much power reaches the receiver at each time delay, with distinct propagation paths appearing as separately resolvable peaks (0042: “Different propagation paths show up as peaks in the PDP, where short propagation paths appear earlier than long paths”), thereby supplying delay-resolved multipath/range information directly usable for the coarse object-location detection that Park performs from its first-stage report (Park et al. (‘516) [0106], [0108]). Formatting Park’s first-RS measurements as Dwivedi et al. (‘143)’s truncated time-domain PDP — reporting only the first few delay taps of interest — provides the base station with the range/delay information needed for coarse detection while constraining reporting overhead, which is a recognized concern for high-dimensional channel reporting. There is a reasonable expectation of success because Dwivedi et al. (‘143) demonstrates that a UE can compute the channel impulse response by inverse Fourier transform of the estimated channel frequency response and report the resulting power delay profile to the network in an operational NR sensing/positioning context ([0027], [0042]) — the identical channel-estimation and signal-processing chain already available to Park’s UE, which necessarily estimates the channel from the received downlink sensing reference signal in order to measure it (Park et al. (‘516) [0108]). The two references are in the same field of NR reference-signal-based UE measurement and reporting, so the modification involves only applying a known reporting format to measurements Park already collects, with predictable results.
Regarding Claim 15, the claim is substantially the same as claim 6 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 6 is applied.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 2021/0392516 A1) in view of Bayesteh et al. (WO 2023/039915 A1).
Regarding Claims 8 and 17, Park et al. (‘516) in view of Bayesteh et al. (‘915) teaches the method and user equipment according to claims 1 and 10 respectively.
The claims recite the same additional limitation in “at least one of” form. They are grouped; the analysis for Claim 8 applies equally to Claim 17. Under the alternative-limitation rule only one of the three recited measurement types need be taught; the third alternative — performing a fine grained image measurement of the second RS — is relied upon, and the remaining alternatives (medium beam measurement; super-fine channel state) need not be separately addressed.
Park et al. (‘516) teaches the parent subject matter of Claim 1 as set forth above, and teaches that the UE measures the second (FR2, fine) RS, which the base station transmits at the fine stage over multiple beams via beam sweeping, and that the UE receives the fine-stage signal on receive beams aimed at the target ([0109]: “there may be multiple transmissions in time with different beams (i.e., beam sweeping)”; [0107]: “the UE 804 receives the sensing signals on one or more receive beams … aimed in the estimated direction of the target object 806”).
Park et al. (‘516) does not explicitly teach that the second measurements comprise performing a fine grained image measurement of the second RS; Park measures the fine-stage signal generically (“measures … the downlink sensing signal”) without specifying a per-beam/per-angle range-and-Doppler map.
Bayesteh et al. (‘915) teaches: performing a fine grained image measurement of the second RS ([0126]: “in the fine sensing stage … the TRP 170 transmits SeRS using narrow beams in the spatial domain (i.e., over different beam steering directions) … performs measurements on received reflected signals for each of the transmitted beams”; [0115]: “The various other measurements may include … range measurements, Doppler measurements, angular measurements … the UE 110 may feedback … the measurements”; [0132]: “the UE 110 may estimate a set of measurement parameters … includes an arrival direction vector … [and] a radial Doppler frequency, fD,i, measured for the arrival direction vector”). Bayesteh et al. (‘915) teaches, at the high-resolution (mmWave) fine sensing stage, acquiring per-beam/per-arrival-direction range and Doppler measurements — i.e., a map of (range, Doppler) per beam/angle — constituting a fine grained image measurement, which the UE feeds back to the network.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the UE’s second measurements in Park’s fine (FR2) sensing stage to comprise a fine grained image measurement — a per-beam map of range and Doppler — as taught by Bayesteh et al. (‘915). One would have been motivated to do so because Bayesteh et al. (‘915) teaches that high-resolution environment sensing and imaging are obtained at the fine stage by transmitting the sensing reference signal over distinct narrow beam steering directions and capturing, for each beam/arrival direction, range and Doppler measurements ([0115], [0126], [0132]). This per-beam range-Doppler characterization operates on precisely the same beam-swept FR2 fine-stage sensing that Park et al. (‘516) already performs (Park et al. (‘516) [0107], [0109]) and yields the angularly-resolved, high-resolution target information required to “refine the estimated location of any target objects” — directly serving Park’s stated objective of higher-accuracy fine detection at FR2 (Park et al. (‘516) [0109]). Producing a (range, Doppler) map per beam extracts substantially more target information from the fine-stage beam sweep that Park already executes, at little added cost. There is a reasonable expectation of success because Bayesteh et al. (‘915) [ demonstrates that per-beam range and Doppler measurements taken over swept narrow beams are operable for high-resolution mmWave sensing and are fed back from the UE to the network ([0115], [0126]) — the same mmWave, beam-swept fine-sensing configuration already disclosed by Park et al. (‘516), in which the UE receives the fine-stage signal on receive beams aimed at the target (Park et al. (‘516) [0107], [0109]). Both references address UE measurement of beamformed mmWave sensing signals, so applying Bayesteh et al. (‘915) [’s per-beam range-Doppler imaging measurement to Park’s FR2 fine stage involves combining known techniques in the same field to obtain predictable results.
Regarding Claim 17, the claim is substantially the same as claim 8 and thus, the same cited sections and rationale as corresponding apparatus claim 8 is applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REMASH R GUYAH whose telephone number is (571)270-0115. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Resha H Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/REMASH R GUYAH/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights