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 .
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.
1. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin (US 2023/0096496) in view of Ryu (US 2019/0260455) and Kalkunte (US 2023/0035010).
2. As per claim 1, Shin teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a radio frequency (RF) sensing node, comprising: at least one memory (Shin, Fig. 1 item 116); at least one transceiver (Shin, ¶0020 “wireless communication”); and at least one processor communicatively connected to the at least one memory and the at least one transceiver (Shin, ¶0015 “processing circuitry”), wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, to a network entity, an indication of at least one of a location of an object, an incident angle of the object, or a reflected angle of the object that is estimated based on using at least one non-radio frequency (non-RF) sensor (Shin, ¶0035-0036 “… cameras … location…”);
While Shin doesn’t explicitly mention, Ryu teaches receive, from the network entity, a beamforming configuration for radio frequency (RF) sensing based on at least one of the location of the object, the incident angle of the object, or the reflected angle of the object (Ryu, ¶0077 “… image processing … beamforming …”. Furthermore, it’s well-known in the art to estimate a parameter based on a non-RF for the benefit of performing beamforming in a communication system -see Kalkunte US 2023/0035010 for example ¶0039 0040 “… image sensing device, such as camera, infrared sensor … beamforming… “); and perform the RF sensing based on the beamforming configuration (Ryu, ¶0077 “… image processing … beamforming …”).
Therefore, taking the combined teaching of Shin, Ryu and Kalkunte as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement for the benefit of estimating a parameter based on a non-RF sensing in order to perform beamforming in a communication system
3. Claims 11 and 20 are similarly analyzed as claim 1 for obviousness reason discussed above.
4. As per claim 2, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: estimate at least one of the location of the object, the incident angle of the object, or the reflected angle of the object using the at least one non-RF sensor (Shin, ¶0035-0036 “… location …”).
5. Claim 12 is similarly analyzed as claim 2 for obviousness reason discussed above.
6. As per claim 3, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: detect there is a non-line of sight (NLOS) channel condition or a potential NLOS channel condition for the RF sensing of the object (Kalkunte, ¶0056 “NLOS”), wherein estimation of at least one of the location of the object, the incident angle of the object, or the reflected angle of the object using the at least one non-RF sensor is based on the detection of the NLOS channel condition or the potential NLOS channel condition for the RF sensing of the object (Kalkunte, ¶0039).
7. Claim 13 is similarly analyzed as claim 3 for obviousness reason discussed above.
8. As per claim 4, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein estimation of at least one of the location of the object, the incident angle of the object, or the reflected angle of the object using the at least one non-RF sensor is processed by an artificial intelligent (AI) processor of the RF sensing node (Shin, ¶0035 “ … artificial intelligent … “).
9. Claim 14 is similarly analyzed as claim 4 for obviousness reason discussed above.
10. As per claim 5, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one non-RF sensor corresponds to at least one camera (Shin, ¶0035).
11. Claim 15 is similarly analyzed as claim 5 for obviousness reason discussed above.
12. As per claim 6, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein to perform the RF sensing based on the beamforming configuration, the at least one processor is configured to at least one of: transmit, for the RF sensing, a first set of reference signals (RSS) via at least one transmission (Tx) beam that is beamformed based on the beamforming configuration (Ryu, ¶0037), or receive, for the RF sensing, a second set of RSs via at least one reception (Rx) beam that is beamformed based on the beamforming configuration (Ryu, ¶0037).
13. Claim 16 is similarly analyzed as claim 6 for obviousness reason discussed above.
14. As per claim 7, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the beamforming configuration configures at least one of a transmission (Tx) beam or a reception (Rx) beam of the RF sensing node (Ryu, ¶0062).
15. Claim 17 is similarly analyzed as claim 7 for obviousness reason discussed above.
16. As per claim 8, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: estimate a distance between the RF sensing node and the object based on the RF sensing (Shin, ¶0044).
17. Claim 18 is similarly analyzed as claim 8 for obviousness reason discussed above.
18. As per claim 9, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the network entity, a resource allocation for performing the RF sensing (Ryu, ¶0078).
19. Claim 19 is similarly analyzed as claim 9 for obviousness reason discussed above.
20. As per claim 10, Shin in view of Ryu and Kalkunte teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the RF sensing node is a base station or a component of the base station (Ryu, ¶0067).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZEWDU A KASSA whose telephone number is (571)270-5253. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, David Payne can be reached at 5712723024. 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.
ZEWDU A. KASSA
Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/ZEWDU A KASSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights