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 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 6-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claim 6-7 should be depended to claim 5. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 5-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11595087. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of following:
Patent
Application
1. A method implemented in a terminal device, comprising: performing a channel estimate between the terminal device and a network device across a predetermined frequency range for a set of beams having different spatial directions;
determining, based on the channel estimate, first indication information indicating at least one beam selected from the set of beams and second indication information indicating frequency-related information for the at least one selected beam at a plurality of frequency locations in the predetermined frequency range;
transmitting to the network device the first indication information in a first part of a channel state information (CSI) report and the second indication information in a second part of the CSI report;
determining, based on the channel estimate, third indication information indicating a respective gain in a time domain for the at least one selected beam applied across the predetermined frequency range and fourth indication information indicating a respective co-phasing shift in the time domain for the at least one selected beam applied across the predetermined frequency range; and transmitting to the network device the third and fourth indication information in the second part of CSI report.
5. (new): A method implemented in a terminal device, comprising: performing a channel measurement between the terminal device and a network device;
determining, based on the channel measurement, first information related to at least one selected beam from a set of beams and second information related to precoding matrix information for the at least one selected beam at a plurality of frequency locations in a predetermined frequency range; and
transmitting, to the network device, the first information in a first part of a channel state information (CSI) report and the second information in a second part of the CSI report.
Regrading to the different between the Application and the Patent as above table. It have been held that the omission of the element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex Parte Raine, 168 USPQ 375 (bd. App. 1969); omission of a reference element whose function is not need would be obvious to one skill in the art.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 5-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gao et al. (Pub. No. 20180254813).
- With respect to claims 5-6, 8-9, 11-12, Gao teaches a method implemented in a terminal device, comprising: performing a channel measurement between the terminal device and a network device (see par. 67; and par. 44 “Each of the grid of DFT beams points to a spatial direction which can be described by an azimuth and elevation angle”); determining, based on the channel measurement, first information related to at least one selected beam from a set of beams (see par. 57 “A wireless device determines the best W.sub.1(l, m) for the whole bandwidth (or wideband) and reports back the indices (l, m)”; par. 58 “For Codebook-Config=2 to 4, however, it is assumed that different beams may be selected in different subbands”; par. 60 “W2 for each subband consists of two parts, i.e. beam selection and co-phasing”; par. 193 “In another embodiment, d.sub.k′≠d.sub.k, i.e. the beams may be selected independently for each polarization”) and second information related to precoding matrix information for the at least one selected beam at a plurality of frequency locations in a predetermined frequency range (see par. 164 and 169); and transmitting, to the network device, the first information in a first part of a channel state information (CSI) report and the second information in a second part of the CSI report (see par. 169 and Fig. 18).
- With respect to claims 7, 10, 13, Gao teaches wherein the plurality of frequency locations are configured by the network device (see par. 4, 9 and 219).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
. Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUC H TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 Flex.
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, Sujoy K. Kundu can be reached at 571-272-8586. 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.
/PHUC H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights