Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 12, 14-16, and 18-20 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan (U.S. Publication 20230262526-A1) in view of Hosseini (U.S. Publication US-20220408451-A1), and Venugopal (U.S. Publication 20240267766-A1).
With respect to claim 1, Yuan teaches a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) (104 in figure 1) comprising: a memory and a processor (See laptop 104 which inherently has memory and processor in figure 1), wherein the processor is configured to: receive a first channel state information (CPU) request and a second CPU request (See Figure 16 and par [141] where Yuan teaches the first and second CPU request periods for the first and second CPU requests respectively).
Yuan teaches determining a first active window for the first CSI request and a second active window for the second CSI request(See figure 16 and par[141]) Yuan teaches two active windows 1610 and 1620 as having 2 CPUs and 4 CPUs respectively.
Yuan teaches determining a first number of computational units (CUs) needed to process the first CPU request in the first active window and a second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window (See paragraph 134 where the current application’s term computational units read on Yuan’s channel state information processing unit (CPU). Also, the current application’s term active window reads on Yuan (Figure 16 and par [141] where Yuan uses the term active CPU occupation time). Also, in figure 16 and par [141], Yuan teaches two active CPU occupation times 1610 and 1620 as having 2 CPUs and 4 CPUs respectively. Also, Yuan teaches the first and second CPU requests being active periods for the first and second CPU requests respectively
Yuan does not teach determining CUs based on a first association rule. However, Hosseini (U.S. Publication US-20220408451-A1) teaches determining CUs based on a first association rule (See paragraph 35 where Hosseini teaches the UE may prioritize and generate triggered CPU reports according to a configured rule or procedure that is based on a CPU processing unit (CPU) capability of the UE). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of determining the number of CUs for each request in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to enhance the processing performance of each CPU request.
Yuan does not teach determining that the second CPU request is an invalid CPU request based on the first number of CUs and the second number of CUs and a number of CUs available to the WTRU. Also, Yuan does not teach of a processor configured to determine that the second CPU request is an invalid CPU request based on the first number of CPUs and the second number of CPUs and a number of CPUs available to the WTRU. However, Hosseini teaches determining that the second CPU request is an invalid CPU request based on the first number of CUs and the second number of CUs and a number of CUs available to the WTRU(See paragraph 91 and figure 2 where Hosseini discloses of a CPU request violating a rule based on the CPU capability of the UE(115a) and making the CPU request invalid). Hosseini teaches(See figure 2) that the UE(115a) is the processor configured to determine that the second CPU request is an invalid CPU request and the number of CPUs available to the WTRU based on CPU capability. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of rule violation based on CPU capability and Hosseini’s teaching of CPU availability to the WTRU based on CPU availability in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to optimize efficiency of processing requests.
Yuan teaches determining active windows for the second CPU request (See figure 16 where 1610 and 1630 are active windows for their respective CPU requests). However, Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of determining an active sub window for the second CPU request. Venugopal teaches determining an active sub windows for the second CPU request (See paragraph 120 and figure 3 where Venugopal teaches time intervals m(e.g., sub-windows). In paragraph 120 and figure 3, Venugopal teaches the control signaling 310 indicating sub windows[m] as one of the resources to be measured in CPU reporting. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of sub windows in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to save the battery power of the UE.
Yuan teaches determining a number of additional CUs needed to process the second CPU request(See figure 16 where the active window 1630 has 4 CPUs to process the second CPU request). Also, Yuan teaches a processor configured to determine a number of additional CUs(See figure 21, where Yuan teaches a flowchart for an example method 2100 for a UE to determine the number of CPUs, where the UE is the processor).
Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach determining, based on a second association rule, a number of additional CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the active sub window. However, Venugopal teaches CPU requests tied to association rules(See paragraph 4 where Venugopal teaches analyzing channel state information (CPU) and obtaining channel quality indicator values (CQI) which are a huge part of CPU requests. Also, Venugopal (paragraph 20) teaches a method for transmitting a first subset of CQIs of the set of multiple CQIs and transmitting a second subset of CQIs of the set of multiple CQIs, where the first subset of CQIs and the second subset of CQIs may be determined in accordance with one or more priority rules. In addition, Venugopal teaches processing second CPU requests in active sub windows(See paragraph 120 and figure 3 where Venugopal teaches a quantity of time intervals m(e.g., sub-windows). In paragraph 120 and figure 3, Venugopal teaches the control signaling 310 indicating sub windows[m] as one of the resources to be measured in CPU reporting. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of priority rules in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to efficiently manage resources and prioritize more urgent UE tasks.
Yuan teaches a processor on a condition that the determined number of additional CUs are available, being able to process the second CPU request(See figure 21 where a flowchart for an example method 2100 for a UE to determine the number CPUs, where the UE is the processor). Also, in figure 16, Yuan teaches the time window 1630 having 4 CPUs and 1630 is the time interval where the second CPU request is processed).
Yuan teaches on a condition that the determined number of additional CUs are not available, to shift the second active window in time to determine a dynamic active window to process the second CPU request(See figure 14 and par [136], where Yuan teaches the length of the CPU occupation time being variable, or Z3’ such that Z3’ can be manipulated to set to a time length needed to process the second CPU request). The current application’s dynamic active window reads on Yuan Z3’ (Figure 14 and paragraph 136 where Z3’ is the dynamic active window when at 1450, the UE 104 may be scheduled to perform CPU measurements without transmitting a CPU report). Moreover, Yuan teaches a processor configured to process the second CPU request (See figure 21 with a flowchart of an example method 2100 for a UE to determine CPU occupancy, where the UE is the processor and figure 16 where the second CPU request is processed at time interval 1630).
Yuan teaches sending a CPU report associated with the second CPU request (See figure 16 where 1630 is the time interval where the second CPU request is transmitted and 1640 is the time interval where the second CPU report is processed).
With respect to claim 2, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1) comprising: a memory and a processor (See laptop 104 which inherently has memory and processor in figure 1), wherein the processor is further configured to send a capability report that indicates one or more of the number of CUs available to the WTRU( See paragraph 134 and figure 14 where Yuan teaches the UE may report a CPU capability indicating the maximum number of CPU operations which can be performed concurrently to the base station). Also, Yuan teaches a processor configured to send a capability report that indicates a number of sub-CUs in one or more of the CUs and a time duration of each CU and each sub-CU(See paragraph 5 where Yuan teaches a CPU pool or a plurality of CPUs and sub CPUs and paragraph 134 and figure 14 where 1650 has a CPU pool which includes time intervals 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1652, 1654, 1656, 1660, 1662, 1664, and 1666).
However, Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a processor configured to send a capability report indicating an active window, an active sub-window, or the dynamic active window. Venugopal (See figure 3 and par [120]) teaches a plurality of active time intervals and a plurality of sub-windows included where 320 is the CPU report and 115a is the UE and processor. Also, the current application’s active window reads on Venugopal (See par[12]) where Venugopal uses the term active time intervals labeled as m. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of active time intervals sub-windows in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid packet collision and efficiently save resources.
With respect to claim 4, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1). Also, the current application’s terms overlapped time-units and active window read on Yuan (See figure 16 and par[142-143]) where Yuan uses the terms overlapping occupation times and active CPU occupation time. However, Yuan does not teach of a first association rule comprising one or more time-related and codebook related parameters associated with the one or more of the first CPU request or the second CPU request, and wherein the second association rule is associated with a number of overlapped time-units in the second active window of the second CPU request. Hosseini teaches the UE may prioritize and generate CPU reports according to a configured rule based on a CPU processing unit (CPU) capability of the UE (See paragraph 35). Hosseini teaches a plurality of priority rules tied to a plurality of time-related parameters, including a sl-Latency Bound-CPU-Report parameter (See par [95] and figure 2where 115a is the UE 225 is the CPU reports and 220 is the CPU requests). Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of codebook related parameters associated with one or more of the first CPU request or the second CPU request, and wherein the second association rule is associated with a number of overlapped time-units in the second active window of the second CPU request. Venugopal teaches a plurality of PMI codebooks for the wireless communication systems enhanced and extended for time-domain (See par[117]) tied to a plurality of rules, which are tied to a plurality of CPU requests where 115a is the UE and 105 is the network entity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of pmi codebooks and Hosseini’s teaching of time-related parameters based on priority rules in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to enable time-sensitive packets to be processed and lower-priority packets be dropped or reallocated.
With regards to claim 5, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1), wherein the processor is further configured to determine a CPU in the dynamic active window when the number of additional CUs are available(See figure 16 and par [134] where Yuan teaches a UE configured to determine a CPU in the active CPU occupation time with additional CPUs available where 1650 has a CPU pool which includes time intervals 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1652, 1654, 1656, 1660, 1662, 1664, and 1666). However, Yuan did not teach of a prioritization rule. Hosseini (See paragraph 35) teaches the UE may prioritize and generate triggered CPU reports according to a configured rule or procedure that is based on a CPU processing unit (CPU) capability of the UE. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini ‘s teaching of prioritize cpu reporting according to a priority rule in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to maximize throughput.
With respect to claim 6, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1), wherein the second CPU request is determined to be an invalid request based on the second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window being greater than the number of available CU(See par[143] where Yuan teaches a base station configuring the UE so the cumulative CPU total does not exceed the UE's capability. Also, the base station may stop scheduling downlink CPU requests go beyond the CPU capability of the UE.
With respect to claim 8, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1). Yuan teaches a plurality of active windows for the second CPU request(See figure 16 and par [35] where 1650 has a plurality of active windows and 1630 is the interval for the second CPU request). However, Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of the active sub-window for the second CPU request comprises a subset of the second active window. Venugopal teaches an active sub window(See par [14]) where Venugopal teaches a subset of time intervals within the plurality of time intervals. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of subsets of time intervals in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid packet collision and efficiently save resources.
With respect to claim 9, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1), wherein the first active window starts at a first time-unit and ends at a second time-unit, and wherein the second active window starts at a third time-unit and ends at a fourth time-unit(See figure 14 and par [135] where a first example of a CPU occupation time, 1410, may extend from a first symbol, 1410, to a last symbol 1416). Yuan (Figure 15 and paragraphs 137 and 139) teaches a CPU occupation time 1510 extending from a first symbol of the periodic CPU-RS 1512 to a last symbol of the CPU request occasion 1514. Also, Yuan teaches a CPU occupation time 1560 may extend from a first symbol of the periodic CPU-RS 1562 to a last symbol of the CPU request occasion 1564.
With respect to claim 10, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 figure 1), wherein the first number of CUs needed to process the first CPU request in the first active window are determined based on a first duration of the first active window, and wherein the second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window are determined based on a second duration of the second active window(See figure 16 and par [141-142] where 1650 is the sum of the number of occupied CPUs for all active CPU occupation times. Yuan teaches that 1610 is the first active CPU occupation time and a first CPU operation may be an uplink request with an occupation time 1610 that occupies 2 CPUs. Yuan teaches a corresponding downlink CPU request may occupy 4 CPUs during occupation time 1620, a second CPU operation may be an uplink request with an occupation time 1630 that occupies 4 CPUs, and a corresponding downlink CPU request may occupy 4 CPUs during occupation time 1640.
With respect to claim 12, Yuan teaches a method further comprising sending a capability report indicating one or more of the total number of CUs available to the WTRU(See par [181] and figure 2) where Yuan teaches a method comprising sending a capability indication that may include a plurality of CPU pool sizes. Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method further comprising sending a capability report indicating a time duration of each CU and each sub-CU. However, Venugopal (par [5]) teaches a method of generating a CPU report including a plurality of CQIs associated with a plurality of time intervals. Also, Venugopal (par [14-15]) gives examples of the method further comprising sending a capability report indicating a time duration of each CU and each sub-CU. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of a method for generating CPU reports tied to time intervals and time durations of the CUs and sub-CUs in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to efficiently save resources and reduce packet dropping.
With respect to claim 14, Yuan (See figure 16 and par [145]) teaches a plurality of overlapping CPU occupation time-units where 1650 may account for a plurality of overlapping CPU request occasion. Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method wherein the first association rule comprises one or more time-related and codebook related parameters associated with the one or more of the first CPU request or the second CPU request, However, Venugopal (par [4 and 268] teaches a method with a plurality of pmi codebooks for the wireless communication systems enhanced and extended for time-domain, which are tied to a plurality of rules, which are tied to a plurality of CPU requests. Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a second association rule associated with a number of overlapped time-units in the second active window of the second CPU request. However, Venugopal (See par [ 175] and figure 7) teaches a method including receiving an indication of a priorization for a plurality of requests where 725 is a control signaling receiving manager, 730 is a reference signal receiving manager, 735 is a measurement manager, 740 is a CPU report generating manager, and 745 is a CPU report transmitting manager. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of a method with pmi codebooks and time-domains and an indication of a priorization for requests in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to reduce latency and efficiently save resources.
With respect to claim 15, Yuan teaches a method, further comprising determining a CPU in the dynamic active window when the number of additional CUs are available(See figure 16 where 1650 has a pool of CPUs that includes 1610, which is the first active time interval). Also, Yuan teaches determining additional CUs(See figure 16 and par [134]) where Yuan teaches a UE configured to determine a CPU in the active CPU occupation time with additional CPUs available where 1650 has a CPU pool which includes time intervals 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1652, 1654, 1656, 1660, 1662, 1664, and 1666). Yuan did not teach of a method wherein the number of additional CUs being determined based on the first association rule. However, Hosseini (See paragraph 35) teaches a method in which the UE may prioritize and generate CPU reports according to a configured rule based on a CPU processing unit (CPU) capability of the UE. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of prioritize cpu reporting according to a priority rule in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to maximize throughput.
With respect to claim 16, Yuan teaches the second CPU request being determined to be an invalid request based on the second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window being greater than the number of available CU(See par[143] where Yuan teaches a base station configuring the UE, so the cumulative CPU total does not exceed the UE's capability. Also, the base station may stop scheduling downlink CPU requests go beyond the CPU capability of the UE. Yuan did not teach of a method wherein the second CPU request is determined to be an invalid request based on the second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window being greater than the number of available CUs. However, Hosseini (See claim 15) teaches a method for determining generation of both the first channel state information report and the second channel state information report would exceed the channel state information processing unit capability of the UE based at least in part on the first number of channel state information processing units and the second number of channel state information processing units. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of a method determining generation of channel state information report exceeding channel state information processing capability in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid dropped packets and optimize throughput.
With respect to claim 18, Yuan teaches a plurality of active windows for the second CPU request(See figure 16 and par [35] where 1650 has a plurality of active windows and 1630 is the interval for the second CPU request). Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method wherein the active sub-window for the second CPU request comprises a subset of the second active window. Venugopal teaches a method with an active sub window(See par [14]) where Venugopal teaches a method with a subset of time intervals within the plurality of time intervals). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of a method with subsets of time intervals in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid packet collision and efficiently save resources.
With respect to claim 19, Yuan teaches a method wherein the first active window starts at a first time-unit and ends at a second time-unit, and wherein the second active window starts at a third time-unit and ends at a fourth time-unit(See par [135] and figure 14), where Yuan teaches a method including a first example of a CPU occupation time, 1410, may extend from a first symbol, 1410, to a last symbol 1416. Also, Yuan (See figure 15 and par[ 137 and 139]) teaches a CPU occupation time 1510 extending from a first symbol of the periodic CPU-RS 1512 to a last symbol of the CPU request occasion 1514. Also, Yuan teaches a CPU occupation time 1560 may extend from a first symbol of the periodic CPU-RS 1562 to a last symbol of the CPU request occasion 1564(See figure 15 and par[137 and 139]).
With respect to claim 20, Yuan teaches a method wherein the first number of CUs needed to process the first CPU request in the first active window are determined based on a first duration of the first active window, and wherein the second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window are determined based on a second duration of the second active window(See figure 16 and par [141-142]) where 1650 is the sum of the number of occupied CPUs for all active CPU occupation times. Yuan teaches (See figure 16 and par [141-142]) that 1610 is the first active CPU occupation time and a first CPU operation may be an uplink request with an occupation time 1610 that occupies 2 CPUs. Also, Yuan teaches (See figure 16 and par [141-142]) of a corresponding downlink CPU request may occupy 4 CPUs during occupation time 1620 and a second CPU operation may be an uplink request with an occupation time 1630 that occupies 4 CPUs and a corresponding downlink CPU request may occupy 4 CPUs during occupation time 1640).
4. Claims 3, 11and 13 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan (U.S. Publication 20230262526-A1) in view of Hosseini (U.S. Publication US-20220408451-A1), Venugopal (U.S. Publication 20240267766-A1), and Yao (U.S. Publication 11570782-B2).
With respect to claim 3, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1). Yuan in view of Hosseini and Venugopal, does not teach of the processor further configured to receive one or more first CPU-RS resources associated with the first CPU request and one or more second CPU-RS resources associated with the second CPU request. However, Yao (See claim 18) teaches receiving a plurality of CPU requests, where the first CPU request specifies the configuration of the first CPU resources on a wireless device in order to generate a first CPU report and a second CPU request thar specifies configuration of second CPU resources on the wireless device to generate a second CPU report. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Yao’s teaching of receiving CPU requests that specify the configuration of CPU resources in the system of Yuan with the motivation to being to allow the UE to provide CQI, PMI, and RI feedback.
With regards to claim 11, Yuan teaches a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU), the method for receiving a first channel state information (CPU) request and a second CPU request (See par [40]) where Yuan teaches a processing system configured to configure the UE to perform a plurality of CPU operations based on the determined number of occupied CPUs. The apparatus can be configured to perform any of the innovative method aspects.
Yuan teaches a method for determining a first active window for the first CPU request and a second active window for the second CPU request (See figure 21 and par [183]) where Yuan teaches a method 2100 with UE 104 determining the number of occupied CPUs may be based on a number of occupied CPUs at block 2130 for each of a number of concurrent CPU operations including uplink CPU requests and DCI-based CPU requests). Yaun teaches that at block 2140, the method 2100 may include performing a plurality of CPU operations based on the determined number of occupied CPUs(par[184]).
Yuan teaches determining a first number of computational units (CUs) needed to process the first CPU request in the first active window and a second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window(See paragraph 134 where the current application’s term computational units reads on Yuan’s channel state information processing unit (CPU)). Also, the current application’s term active window reads on Yuan (Figure 16 and par [141] where Yuan uses the term active CPU occupation time). Also, in figure 16 and par [141], Yuan teaches two active CPU occupation times 1610 and 1620 as having 2 CPUs and 4 CPUs respectively. Also, Yuan (figure 16 and par [141]) teaches the first and second CPU requests being active periods for the first and second CPU requests respectively.
Yuan does not teach of a method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit(WTRU), that comprises determining, based on a first association rule, a first number of computational units (CUs) needed to process the first CPU request in the first active window and a second number of CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the second active window. However, Hosseini (See par [185] and figure 7) teaches a priority rule manager 760 may be configured as or otherwise support a means for receiving, via the control signaling, an indication of the plurality of priority rules, where generating the CPU report is based on receiving the indication of the one or more priority rules). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of a method including a priority rule manager configured to receive an indication of a plurality of priority rules in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to make certain that time-sensitive tasks are first prioritized.
In addition, Yuan does not teach of a method for determining the second CPU request is an invalid CPU request based on the first number of CUs and the second number of CUs and a total number of CUs available to the WTRU. However, Hosseini (See Claim 15) teaches a method for determining generation of both the first channel state information report and the second channel state information report would exceed the channel state information processing unit capability of the UE based at least in part on the first number of channel state information processing units and the second number of channel state information processing units. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Hosseini’s teaching of a method for determining channel state information report exceeding channel state information processing unit capability in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid dropped packets and optimize throughput.
Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method for determining an active sub-window for the second CPU request. However, Venugopal (See par [253]) teaches a method for wireless communication at a UE, comprising generating a CPU report comprising a plurality of CQIs that are collectively associated with a plurality of time intervals within the set of time resources. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of a method with active time intervals sub-windows in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to avoid packet collision and efficiently save resources.
Yuan teaches determining additional CUs(See figure 16 and par [134] where Yuan teaches a UE configured to determine a CPU in the active CPU occupation time with additional CPUs available where 1650 has a CPU pool which includes time intervals 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1652, 1654, 1656, 1660, 1662, 1664, and 1666). Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method for determining, based on a second association rule, a number of additional CUs needed to process the second CPU request in the active sub-window. Venugopal(See paragraph 21) discloses a method for receiving an indication of a plurality of priority rules associated with an additional plurality of cgi values, which are a huge part of CPUs and to use them to process CPU requests in a sub active occupational time. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of a method for receiving an indication of a plurality of priority rules in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to efficiently manage resources and prioritize more urgent UE tasks.
Yuan teaches a method, on a condition the determined number of additional CUs are available, for processing the second CPU request (See paragraph 5) where Yuan taught of a method including determining that at least one channel state information (CPU) processing unit (CPU) from a CPU pool is occupied by an uplink CPU request from a CPU reference signal (CPU-RS) to at least a CPU request occasion). In addition, Yuan (See figure 16) teaches 1610, 1620, 1630, 1640, 1652, 1654, 1656, 1658, 1660, 1662, 1664, and 1666 as being windows where there are CPU request occasions. Yuan teaches a method performed by a wireless transmit/receiver unit(WTRU), the method comprising: on a condition the determined number of additional CUs are not available, shifting the second active window in time to determine a dynamic active window to process the second CPU request (See figure 14 and par [136]) where the length of the CPU occupation time being variable Z3 and allowing or Z3’ to be set to a time length needed to process the second CPU request. The current application’s dynamic active window reads on Yuan’s Z3’ (See figure 14 and par [136]).
Yuan in view of Hosseini does not teach of a method for sending a CPU report associated with the second CPU request. However, Yao teaches a method of receiving a plurality of CPU requests, where the first CPU request specifies configuration of the first CPU resources on a wireless device to generate a first CPU report and a second CPU request specifying configuration of second CPU resources on the wireless device to generate a second CPU report (See Claim 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Yao’s teaching of receiving a plurality of CPU requests configuring CPU resources in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to allow the UE to provide CQI, PMI, and RI feedback.
With respect to claim 13, Yuan, in view of Hosseini and Venugopal did not teach of a method further comprising receiving one or more first CPU-RS resources associated with the first CPU request and one or more second CPU-RS resources associated with the second CPU request. However, Yao teaches a method for receiving a plurality of CPU requests, where the first CPU request specifies the configuration of the first CPU resources on a wireless device in order to generate a first CPU report and a second CPU request thar specifies configuration of second CPU resources on the wireless device to generate a second CPU report (See Claim 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Yao’s teaching of a method receiving a plurality of CPU requests configuring CPU resources in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to allow the UE to provide CQI, PMI, and RI feedback.
5. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Hosseini (U.S. Publication US-20220408451-A1), Venugopal (U.S. Publication 20240267766-A1), and Dalsgaard (US-20240259852-A1).
With respect to claim 7, Yuan teaches the WTRU of claim 1(104 in figure 1) configured to receive rrc (radio resource control) signaling (See paragraph 126 and figure 10). The rrc signaling configures a trigger list, which may be a CPU trigger list defining CPU trigger states with request ids 1-8. Also, Yuan (See paragraph 71) teaches the bs (base station) transmitting an uplink grant which schedules specific resources for the a-CPU and provides a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resource for a CPU report. The UE may have a limited number of resources for processing the CPU report. Yuan in view of Hosseini and Venugopal, did not teach of the UE having an indication the CPU associated with the CPU request id is being determined and ready for reporting. However, Dalsgaard teaches the UE may perform measurements on reference signals received from the network, and transmit channel state information CPU reports, including channel quality indicators CQIs determined based on the performed measurements(See paragraph 52 and figure 1 where 115 is the UE). After measurements are done, the CPU‘s readiness for reporting is based on the CQI data measured. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Dalsgaard’s teaching of the UE performing reference signal measurements and transmitting channel state information CPU reports in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to better estimate channel quality and schedule resources.
With respect to claim 17, Yuan teaches a method where rrc signaling configures a trigger list, which may be a CPU trigger list defining CPU trigger states with request IDs 1-8 (See par[126] and figure 10). Also, Yuan teaches a method of receiving uplink resources used for sending a CPU report (See figure 14 and par[134]). However, Yuan in view of Hosseini and Venugopal did not teach of a method for sending an indication that the CPU associated with the CPU request id is being determined and ready for reporting. Dalsgaard teaches a method where the UE may perform measurements on reference signals received from the network, and transmit channel state information CPU reports, including channel quality indicators CQIs determined based on the performed measurements(See paragraph 52 and figure 1 where 115 is the UE). After measurements are taken, the CPU’s readiness for reporting is based on the CQI data. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Dalsgaard’s teaching of the method for the UE performing reference signal measurements and transmitting channel state information CPU reports in the system of Yuan with the motivation being to better estimate channel quality and schedule resources.
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Cheng (US20260040126A1) teaches a wireless communication system which supports a single-CPU feedback scheme and a multi-CPU feedback scheme (paragraph 55 and Figure 1).
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UBON BASSEY EPHRAIM whose telephone number is (571)270-5799. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/U.B.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2461 /HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
