METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BEAM MANAGEMENT

§102 §103

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 21st October 2024 and 26th December 2024 are 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 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. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Abinader et al (US 2023/0318684 A1). Claim 1. Abinader shows a method (abstract), the method comprising: communicating, between a network device and an apparatus (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15 and 16: UE and gNB), information related to one or more beam reliabilities ([0006]: estimate models… whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay), wherein each beam reliability relates to (1) beam time-of-stay ([0089]: while for (a) the gNB can trigger the CSI-RS repetition right after P2 and/or periodically, the determination of UE panel time-of-stay (ToS) for (b) cannot be determined beforehand, because of both external factors (e.g. an incoming blocker in the link path) and internal factors (e.g. a user putting their hand on top of the currently selected UE panel)) or (2) beam blockage probability and the beam time-of-stay (see above), for a respective beam for the apparatus ([0031]: the time-of-stay comprising a duration for which the antenna panel is active for transmission and/or reception; and determining whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay; [0090]: this assumed a gNB beamset of 14 BS beams over the 120° width of each sector, and omni-directional UEs with 4 panels pointed at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° respectively… the UEs are moving in straight lines, executing regular cell mobility and beam mobility procedures as they move across boundaries of cells and BS beams, respectively; [0095]: a UE may decide based upon external factors e.g. an incoming blocker or a user’s hand switching positions on their UE, regardless of the execution or not of narrow UE beam alignment). Claim 2. Abinader shows the method of claim 1, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities comprises a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0171]: a ToS field comprises a mean UE panel ToS field… a floating-point with the exact value of the UE panel ToS with some precision (e.g. 32-bits); [0173]: a duration field comprises an expected P3 procedure duration. In one exemplary (but non-limiting) implementation the expected P3 procedure duration field comprises a floating-point with the exact value of the expected duration of the P3 procedure with some precision (e.g. 32-bits)). Claim 5. Abinader shows the method of claim 1, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities is obtained from one or more of: an estimate of location of the apparatus ([0093]: specific cell location; [0122]: in any given cell, the estimation model (whether that is cell-wide, beam-wide, location wide, etc.) can be used by the UE to determine or classify whether a given UE panel ToS is large-enough for the execution of the narrow UE beam alignment, or not); an estimate of velocity of the apparatus ([0093]: the ToS for a given UE panel is related to the angular speed, i.e. how fast serving BS beams are being switched, as there might be UE panel switches caused not by the propagation conditions but by changes in the best UE panel to use for a new serving BS beam that has just been switched to); an information store containing information about which beams can be used as a function of location ([0134]: the UE also collects additional contextual information (e.g. cell ID, BS beam ID, UE beam ID, UE panel ID, distance to the cell, exact GPS location, time of day, etc . . . )); an information store containing information about blockage probability as a function of location and time (n/a); or sensing information obtained by either the network device or the apparatus (n/a). Claim 6. Abinader shows the method claim 1, further comprising: transmitting signaling to the apparatus requesting the apparatus to transmit feedback regarding a certain beam or beams for purpose of building beam reliability information ([0194]: the UE may actively request the CSI-RS repetition burst by utilizing the next UL grant after the decision to trigger narrow UE beam alignment); and receiving the feedback ([0195]: the UE performs the reception of each individual CSI-RS repetition burst… track or monitor whether the narrow UE beam alignment was executed to its completion or not). Claim 7. Abinader shows the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting signaling to the apparatus configuring a number of bits to be used to convey a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0123]: classify the UE panel ToS to support the narrow UE beam alignment procedure… accordingly which level of granularity is used… the UE panel configuration and UE beamset – the configuration involves “bits” in order to be configured). ---------- ---------- ---------- Claim 8. Abinader shows a method (abstract), the method comprising: communicating, between an apparatus and a network device (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15 and 16: UE and gNB), information related to one or more beam reliabilities ([0006]: estimate models… whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay), wherein each beam reliability relates to (1) beam time-of-stay ([0089]: while for (a) the gNB can trigger the CSI-RS repetition right after P2 and/or periodically, the determination of UE panel time-of-stay (ToS) for (b) cannot be determined beforehand, because of both external factors (e.g. an incoming blocker in the link path) and internal factors (e.g. a user putting their hand on top of the currently selected UE panel)) or (2) beam blockage probability and the beam time-of-stay (see above), for a respective beam for the apparatus ([0031]: the time-of-stay comprising a duration for which the antenna panel is active for transmission and/or reception; and determining whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay; [0090]: this assumed a gNB beamset of 14 BS beams over the 120° width of each sector, and omni-directional UEs with 4 panels pointed at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° respectively… the UEs are moving in straight lines, executing regular cell mobility and beam mobility procedures as they move across boundaries of cells and BS beams, respectively; [0095]: a UE may decide based upon external factors e.g. an incoming blocker or a user’s hand switching positions on their UE, regardless of the execution or not of narrow UE beam alignment). Claim 9. Abinader shows the method of claim 8, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities comprises a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0171]: a ToS field comprises a mean UE panel ToS field… a floating-point with the exact value of the UE panel ToS with some precision (e.g. 32-bits); [0173]: a duration field comprises an expected P3 procedure duration. In one exemplary (but non-limiting) implementation the expected P3 procedure duration field comprises a floating-point with the exact value of the expected duration of the P3 procedure with some precision (e.g. 32-bits)). ---------- ---------- ---------- Claim 11. Abinader shows a network device (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15, 16 and 17: UE), comprising: one or more processors (fig. 17: data processing entity 1701), when executing program instructions stored in the network device (fig. 17: memory 1702 + software 1703), cause the network device to: communicate, between the network device and an apparatus (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15, 16 and 17: UE and gNB), information related to one or more beam reliabilities, wherein each beam reliability relates to (1) beam time-of-stay ([0089]: while for (a) the gNB can trigger the CSI-RS repetition right after P2 and/or periodically, the determination of UE panel time-of-stay (ToS) for (b) cannot be determined beforehand, because of both external factors (e.g. an incoming blocker in the link path) and internal factors (e.g. a user putting their hand on top of the currently selected UE panel)) or (2) beam blockage probability and the beam time-of-stay (see above), for a respective beam for the apparatus ([0031]: the time-of-stay comprising a duration for which the antenna panel is active for transmission and/or reception; and determining whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay; [0090]: this assumed a gNB beamset of 14 BS beams over the 120° width of each sector, and omni-directional UEs with 4 panels pointed at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° respectively… the UEs are moving in straight lines, executing regular cell mobility and beam mobility procedures as they move across boundaries of cells and BS beams, respectively; [0095]: a UE may decide based upon external factors e.g. an incoming blocker or a user’s hand switching positions on their UE, regardless of the execution or not of narrow UE beam alignment). Claim 12. Abinader shows the network device of claim 11, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities comprises a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0171]: a ToS field comprises a mean UE panel ToS field… a floating-point with the exact value of the UE panel ToS with some precision (e.g. 32-bits); [0173]: a duration field comprises an expected P3 procedure duration… implementation the expected P3 procedure duration field comprises a floating-point with the exact value of the expected duration of the P3 procedure with some precision (e.g. 32-bits)). Claim 15. Abinader shows the network device of claim 11, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities is obtained from one or more of: an estimate of location of the apparatus ([0093]: specific cell location; [0122]: in any given cell, the estimation model (whether that is cell-wide, beam-wide, location wide, etc.) can be used by the UE to determine or classify whether a given UE panel ToS is large-enough for the execution of the narrow UE beam alignment, or not); an estimate of velocity of the apparatus ([0093]: the ToS for a given UE panel is related to the angular speed, i.e. how fast serving BS beams are being switched, as there might be UE panel switches caused not by the propagation conditions but by changes in the best UE panel to use for a new serving BS beam that has just been switched to); an information store containing information about which beams can be used as a function of location ([0134]: the UE also collects additional contextual information (e.g. cell ID, BS beam ID, UE beam ID, UE panel ID, distance to the cell, exact GPS location, time of day, etc . . . )); an information store containing information about blockage probability as a function of location and time (n/a); or sensing information obtained by either the network device or the apparatus (n/a). Claim 16. Abinader shows the network device of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors further cause the network device to: transmit signaling to the apparatus requesting the apparatus to transmit feedback regarding a certain beam or beams for purpose of building beam reliability information ([0194]: the UE may actively request the CSI-RS repetition burst by utilizing the next UL grant after the decision to trigger narrow UE beam alignment); and receive the feedback ([0195]: the UE performs the reception of each individual CSI-RS repetition burst… track or monitor whether the narrow UE beam alignment was executed to its completion or not). Claim 17. Abinader shows the network device of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors further cause the network device to: transmit signaling to the apparatus configuring a number of bits to be used to convey a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0123]: classify the UE panel ToS to support the narrow UE beam alignment procedure… accordingly which level of granularity is used… the UE panel configuration and UE beamset – the configuration involves “bits” in order to be configured). ---------- ---------- ---------- Claim 18. Abinader shows an apparatus (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15, 16 and 17: UE), comprising: one or more processors (fig. 17: data processing entity 1701), when executing program instructions stored in the apparatus (fig. 17: memory 1702 + software 1703), cause the apparatus to: communicate, between the apparatus and a network device (figs. 8, 9, 11, 15 and 16: UE and gNB), information related to one or more beam reliabilities ([0006]: estimate models… whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay), wherein each beam reliability relates to (1) beam time-of-stay ([0089]: while for (a) the gNB can trigger the CSI-RS repetition right after P2 and/or periodically, the determination of UE panel time-of-stay (ToS) for (b) cannot be determined beforehand, because of both external factors (e.g. an incoming blocker in the link path) and internal factors (e.g. a user putting their hand on top of the currently selected UE panel)) or (2) beam blockage probability and the beam time-of-stay (see above), for a respective beam for the apparatus ([0031]: the time-of-stay comprising a duration for which the antenna panel is active for transmission and/or reception; and determining whether to perform a narrow beam alignment procedure for the apparatus based on the estimated time-of-stay; [0090]: this assumed a gNB beamset of 14 BS beams over the 120° width of each sector, and omni-directional UEs with 4 panels pointed at 0°, 90°, 180° and 270° respectively… the UEs are moving in straight lines, executing regular cell mobility and beam mobility procedures as they move across boundaries of cells and BS beams, respectively; [0095]: a UE may decide based upon external factors e.g. an incoming blocker or a user’s hand switching positions on their UE, regardless of the execution or not of narrow UE beam alignment). Claim 19. Abinader shows the apparatus of claim 18, wherein the information related to the one or more beam reliabilities comprises a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0171]: a ToS field comprises a mean UE panel ToS field… a floating-point with the exact value of the UE panel ToS with some precision (e.g. 32-bits); [0173]: a duration field comprises an expected P3 procedure duration. In one exemplary (but non-limiting) implementation the expected P3 procedure duration field comprises a floating-point with the exact value of the expected duration of the P3 procedure with some precision (e.g. 32-bits)). ---------- ---------- ---------- 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. 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 3, 10, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abinader et al in view of Liu et al (US 2023/0039107 A1). Claim 3. Abinader shows the method of claim 2; Abinader does not expressly describe wherein the one or more bits are used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in the respective set of one or more bits indicating the respective beam reliability of each beam.Liu teaches feature of one or more bits being used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0038]: by repeating such a pairwise Polarizing operation on a set of N=2n independent uses of a binary-input channel, a set of 2n bit-channels of varying qualities, in terms of the reliability in communicating a single bit, can be obtained for any given integer n; [0156]: different subject transmissions may be on the same carrier or different carriers (e.g. in a carrier aggregation), and/or same or different bandwidth parts, and/or on the same or different layers or beams, e.g. in a MIMO scenario, and/or to same or different ports… subject transmissions may pertain to different HARQ or ARQ processes (or different sub-processes, e.g. in MIMO with different beams/layers associated to the same process identifier, but different sub-process-identifiers like swap bits)).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the 2N levels of reliability scheme as taught by Liu to the beam classification process of Abinader to facilitate indicating the order with which bit-channels should be used to carry data. Claim 10. Abinader shows the method of claim 9; Abinader does not expressly describe wherein the one or more bits are used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in the respective set of one or more bits indicating the respective beam reliability of each beam.Liu teaches feature of one or more bits being used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0038]: by repeating such a pairwise Polarizing operation on a set of N=2n independent uses of a binary-input channel, a set of 2n bit-channels of varying qualities, in terms of the reliability in communicating a single bit, can be obtained for any given integer n; [0156]: different subject transmissions may be on the same carrier or different carriers (e.g. in a carrier aggregation), and/or same or different bandwidth parts, and/or on the same or different layers or beams, e.g. in a MIMO scenario, and/or to same or different ports… subject transmissions may pertain to different HARQ or ARQ processes (or different sub-processes, e.g. in MIMO with different beams/layers associated to the same process identifier, but different sub-process-identifiers like swap bits)).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the 2N levels of reliability scheme as taught by Liu to the beam classification process of Abinader to facilitate indicating the order with which bit-channels should be used to carry data. Claim 13. Abinader shows the network device of claim 12; Abinader does not expressly describe wherein the one or more bits are used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in the respective set of one or more bits indicating the respective beam reliability of each beam.Liu teaches feature of one or more bits being used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0038]: by repeating such a pairwise Polarizing operation on a set of N=2n independent uses of a binary-input channel, a set of 2n bit-channels of varying qualities, in terms of the reliability in communicating a single bit, can be obtained for any given integer n; [0156]: different subject transmissions may be on the same carrier or different carriers (e.g. in a carrier aggregation), and/or same or different bandwidth parts, and/or on the same or different layers or beams, e.g. in a MIMO scenario, and/or to same or different ports… subject transmissions may pertain to different HARQ or ARQ processes (or different sub-processes, e.g. in MIMO with different beams/layers associated to the same process identifier, but different sub-process-identifiers like swap bits)).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the 2N levels of reliability scheme as taught by Liu to the beam classification process of Abinader to facilitate indicating the order with which bit-channels should be used to carry data. Claim 20. Abinader shows the apparatus of claim 19; Abinader does not expressly describe wherein the one or more bits are used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in the respective set of one or more bits indicating the respective beam reliability of each beam.Liu teaches feature of one or more bits being used to classify each beam into one of up to 2N levels of reliabilities, where N is a number of bits in a respective set of one or more bits indicating a respective beam reliability of each beam ([0038]: by repeating such a pairwise Polarizing operation on a set of N=2n independent uses of a binary-input channel, a set of 2n bit-channels of varying qualities, in terms of the reliability in communicating a single bit, can be obtained for any given integer n; [0156]: different subject transmissions may be on the same carrier or different carriers (e.g. in a carrier aggregation), and/or same or different bandwidth parts, and/or on the same or different layers or beams, e.g. in a MIMO scenario, and/or to same or different ports… subject transmissions may pertain to different HARQ or ARQ processes (or different sub-processes, e.g. in MIMO with different beams/layers associated to the same process identifier, but different sub-process-identifiers like swap bits)).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the 2N levels of reliability scheme as taught by Liu to the beam classification process of Abinader to facilitate indicating the order with which bit-channels should be used to carry data. ========== ========== ========== Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4 and 14 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 is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. 1. Venkatraman, US 9,826,446 B2: in a heterogeneous cellular network comprising at least one macro cell and one or more pico cells wherein the one or more the pico cells each have coverage regions that are configurable to at least partially overlap a coverage region of the macro cell, an apparatus for an enhanced Node B (eNB) comprising processing circuitry to configure a pico cell of the one or more pico cells to: adjust an operating range of the pico cell in response to one or more trigger conditions to dynamically react to a deployment scenario, wherein to adjust the operating range of the pico cell one or more triggers for cell-reselection are dynamically decreased or increased in response to the one or more trigger conditions, detect user equipment (UE) in a surrounding area based on at least one of a number of physical-random-access channel (PRACH) attempts over a predetermined period of time or interference on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH); and adjust the operating range of the pico cell proportional to a number of UEs detected in the surrounding area such that the operating range of the pico cell increases or decreases with respective increasing or decreasing UEs detected in the surrounding area; and an interface configured to couple the processing circuitry with an antenna configured to communicate with the pico cell; wherein the processing circuitry is to configure the apparatus to: compare an RSRP of a neighbor cell with an RSRP of a serving pico cell, the RSRP of the neighbor cell being measured at or near an edge of the serving pico cell; and when the neighbor cell is a macro cell: adjust the operating range of the serving pico cell dependent on the RSRP of the neighbor cell and dependent on a sojourn time for UEs at or near the edge of the serving pico cell, wherein the operating range of the serving pico cell is decreased to reduce handover attempts from the macro cell to the pico cell. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xavier Szewai Wong whose telephone number is 571.270.1780. The examiner can normally be reached on 11:30 am - 8:30 pm Mon to Fri. 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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571.270.1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /XAVIER S WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415 28th September 2026