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 .
2. This office action is a response to an application filed on 10/24/2024 where claims 1-5 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2024 has been considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37CFR 1.97.
Drawings
4. The drawings were received on 10/30/2024. These drawing are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman et al. (US 20190059013 A1)hereinafter Rahman and further in view of Huang et al. (US 20210127387 A1)hereinafter Huang
As to claim 1 Rahman teaches A terminal comprising: a processor that generates at least one of channel state information (CSI) report including a plurality of; ([0017][0073] Fig. 3, The UE further comprises a processor operably connected to the transceiver, the processor configured to calculate the K CSI reports and partition the K CSI reports into N parts; plurality of sub-report1,)
and a transmitter that transmits the at least one of the CSI report, (0077] Fig. 3, The processor 340 is also capable of executing other processes and programs resident in the memory 360, such as processes for CSI reporting on PUCCH.)
wherein the processor determines allocations of the plurality of the CSI sub-reports in the CSI report according to IDs of the plurality of, ([0233][0235] Fig. 12B, If the UE finds that the total CSI payload (the number of UCI information bits associated with the CSI report) exceeds the number of bits that can be accommodated within the PUSCH resources for UCI transmission (either explicitly or implicitly allocated to the UE) or, optionally, exceeds a certain threshold (either fixed or configured), the UE transmits the first UCI part as is i.e., two-part UCI design as Part 1 CSI report, Part 2 CSI report, plurality of sub-report1)
wherein a priority of is determined according to the IDs of the plurality of ([0241] [0249] two-part UCI design when the number of UCI information bits associated with the CSI report, priority rule or order for the transmission of these parts i.e., CSI report Part 1, CSI report Part 2, is according to the increasing order of the index i of these parts, i.e., Q0→Q1→Q2, where Q0 has the highest priority for UCI transmission, Q1 is next in priority for UCI transmission, and Q2 has the least priority; plurality of sub-report1)
Rahman does not specifically teach the CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports
Huang teaches the CSI sub-reports, ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teaching of Huang with the teaching of Rahman because Huang teaches that feedback provided by the UE, would allow for proper decoding and reading of the CSI provided by the UE thereby allowing to determine whether that one or more DCI transmissions are lost. (Huang [0095])
Claim 4 is/are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
As to claim 2 the combination of Rahman and Huang specifically Rahman teaches wherein the CSI sub-report having a smaller ID has a higher priority. ([0241] [0249] two-part UCI design when the number of UCI information bits associated with the CSI report, priority rule or order for the transmission of these parts i.e., CSI report Part 1, CSI report Part 2, is according to the increasing order of the index i of these parts, i.e., Q0→Q1→Q2, where Q0 has the highest priority for UCI transmission, Q1 is next in priority for UCI transmission, and Q2 has the least priority, Q0 has highest priority.)
As to claim 5 Rahman teaches A system comprising a terminal and a base station, wherein the terminal comprises: ([0071] [0073] Fig. 2, eNB and UE includes a processor)
, a processor that generates at least one of channel state information (CSI) report including a plurality of; ([0017][0073] Fig. 3, The UE further comprises a processor operably connected to the transceiver, the processor configured to calculate the K CSI reports and partition the K CSI reports into N parts; plurality of sub-report1,)
and a transmitter that transmits the at least one of the CSI report, (0077] Fig. 3, The processor 340 is also capable of executing other processes and programs resident in the memory 360, such as processes for CSI reporting on PUCCH.)
wherein the processor determines allocations of the plurality of in the CSI report according to IDs of the plurality of([0233][0235]Fig. 3 Fig. 12B, If the UE finds that the total CSI payload (the number of UCI information bits associated with the CSI report) exceeds the number of bits that can be accommodated within the PUSCH resources for UCI transmission (either explicitly or implicitly allocated to the UE) or, optionally, exceeds a certain threshold (either fixed or configured), the UE transmits the first UCI part as is i.e., two-part UCI design as Part 1 CSI report, Part 2 CSI report; plurality of sub-report1)
, wherein a priority of is determined according to the IDs of the plurality of ([0241] [0249] two-part UCI design when the number of UCI information bits associated with the CSI report, priority rule or order for the transmission of these parts i.e., CSI report Part 1, CSI report Part 2, is according to the increasing order of the index i of these parts, i.e., Q0→Q1→Q2, where Q0 has the highest priority for UCI transmission, Q1 is next in priority for UCI transmission, and Q2 has the least priority; plurality of sub-report1)
and the base station comprises a receiver that receives the at least one of the CSI report.([0015][0065] Fig. 2, the UE may report (e.g., feedback) information about channel measurement, e.g., CSI, to the eNB; RF transceivers 210a-210n eNB receive, from the antennas 205a-205n, incoming RF signals)
Rahman does not specifically teach the CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports,
Huang teaches the CSI sub-reports, t ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
the CSI sub-reports, CSI sub-reports, the CSI sub-reports ([0101] Fig. 4, each CSI report may be partitioned into two or more portions. first portion 405 in the example of FIG. 4 may correspond to CSI part 1 information for each CSI report, and a second portion 410 may correspond to CSI part 2 information for each CSI report.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teaching of Huang with the teaching of Rahman because Huang teaches that feedback provided by the UE, would allow for proper decoding and reading of the CSI provided by the UE thereby allowing to determine whether that one or more DCI transmissions are lost. (Huang [0095])
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman, Huang and further in view of Choi et al. (US 20210320703 A1)hereinafter Choi
As to claim 3 the combination of Rahman and Huang specifically Rahman teaches does not teach , wherein the IDs of the plurality of the CSI sub-reports are notified to the terminal by an RRC signaling.
Choi teaches , wherein the IDs of the plurality of the CSI sub-reports are notified to the terminal by an RRC signaling.([0273] a resource ID set (a resource ID set according to multiple reporting settings), association information may be preset in the unit of CRI set according to all (N) or some (K, N>K) reporting settings, the SSB ID set of all or some of the reporting settings, or CRI set+SSB ID set or may be set by higher layer (RRC).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teaching of Choi with the teaching of Rahman and Huang because Choi teaches that association information is determined according to a preset association state thereby reducing amount of information and dynamic selection of association information like reducing PMIs, resource ID, and/or CQI of the associated reporting setting per TRP. (Choi [03036])
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SIOMINA; Iana et al. [US 20200178129 A1] METHOD FOR DETERMINATION BETWEEN INTRA- AND INTER-FREQUENCY OPERATIONS
Geirhofer; Stefan et al. [US 9559820 B2] Feedback reporting based on channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) groups
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATIQUE AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-6244. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 7:30 PM M-F Eastern.
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, Un Cho can be reached at 5712727919. 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.
/ATIQUE AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights