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 on 04/18/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-15, 20) in the reply filed on 06/10/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant has cancelled claims 16-19 (directed to non-elected Group II) and added new claims 21-24. Claims 1-15, 20-24 are examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-15, 20-24 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 10 the recited “generate CSI feedback” should be “generate channel state information (CSI) feedback”.
Claim 8, line 1 the recited “wherein the CSI feedback comprises:” should be “wherein generating the CSI feedback comprises:”.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-15 are also objected to since they depend on objected claim 1.
Claim 20, line 6 the recited “generating CSI feedback” should be “generating channel state information (CSI) feedback”.
Dependent claims 21-23 are also objected to since they depend on objected claim 20.
Claim 24, line 7 the recited “generate CSI feedback” should be “generate channel state information (CSI) feedback”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 15, 20-21, 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160)(reference cited in the 04/18/2025 IDS).
With respect to claim 1, Doostnejad et al. disclose: An apparatus (refer to the station of Fig. 26 ([0025], lines 1-4, 8-16 of [0053], [0154]) implementing for example STA11 of Fig. 3 (or Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 or Fig. 6)) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one transceiver (e.g. transceiver 2610, lines 1-4 of [0155]); at least one memory (last two sentences of [0156], approximate second half of [0156], [0161]) comprising computer-executable instructions (last two sentences of [0156], approximate second half of [0156], [0161] refer to the instructions …read and executed by a processor to perform the operations described); and one or more processors configured to execute the computer-executable instructions (at least lines 8-11 of [0156],[0161]) to cause the apparatus to: receive one or more packets (Fig. 3 (or Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 or Fig. 6), refer to the reception of the NDP (null data packet) from AP1 and AP2) , from a first wireless node (AP1) and at least one second wireless node (AP2) via the at least one transceiver (at least lines 1-4 of [0155]), wherein the apparatus and the first wireless node (AP1) are associated with a first basic service set (BSS)([0065]-[0066], in particular lines 16-19 of [0066] refer to the BSS of AP1 and the BSS of AP2, BSS stands for basic service set, second to last line of [0041]) and the second wireless node (AP2) is associated with a second BSS (AP2’s BSS); generate CSI feedback, based on the one or more packets (lines 17-18, 23-end of [0066], CSI feedback (refer to the CSI report of Fig. 3 (or Fig. 4, or Fig. 5, or Fig. 6), approximate second half of [0067], also [0041]) for a first channel (approximate second half of [0066]-[0067] already cited above, “…channel between AP1 and the STA…”) between the apparatus (STA11) and the first wireless node (AP1) and for a second channel l (approximate second half of [0066]-[0067] already cited above, “…channel between AP2 and the STA… between the apparatus (STA11) and the second wireless node (AP2); and provide, via the at least one transceiver, the CSI feedback to at least the first wireless node (last three sentences of [0067] the CSI report of Fig. 3 (or Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 or Fig. 6)).
With respect to claim 2, Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the CSI feedback is also provided, via the at least one transceiver, directly from the apparatus to the second wireless node (refer to the CSI report of Fig. 3 ((or Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 or Fig. 6, approximate second half of [0067]),
With respect to claim 4, Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the one or more packets comprise first and second packets received sequentially (Fig. 3, refer to the NDP received from AP1 and the NDP received from AP2 (or refer to the respective NDPs received from AP1 and AP2 of Fig. 4 or Fig. 5 or Fig. 6) from the first wireless node and second wireless node.
With respect to claim 15, Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the apparatus is configured to operate as a wireless station (STA11, lines 1-20 of [0053] refer to the disclosed user equipment or (wireless) station).
Method claims 20-21, 23 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject apparatus claims 1-2, 4 above.
With respect to claim 24, refer above to the rejection of claim 1 and regarding the claimed “A non-transitory computer-readable medium” refer to the approximate second half of [0156], [0161] e.g. refer to the disclosed read-only memory (ROM) corresponding to the claimed “A non-transitory computer-readable medium”).
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.
Claims 3, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160) in view of Wang et al. (U.S. 10,944,457)
With respect to claim 3, Doostnejad et al. do not disclose: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the at least one transceiver, signaling indicating a requested rank for the CSI feedback, wherein the provided CSI feedback is of the requested rank.
Implementing CSI reporting (feedback) Wang et al. disclose: receive, via at least one transceiver, signaling indicating a requested rank for a CSI feedback, wherein a provided CSI feedback is of the requested rank (column 9, lines 62-67, restricted CSI measurement information, column 10, lines 1-6, 22-39, 57-62 base station transmits to a UE the rank restriction for CSI).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad et al. based on the teachings of Wang et al., to use a restricted rank measurement instructions received by the UE, to instruct the UE of Doosnejad et al. to measure only CSI required by AP1 (for example) and eliminate interference caused by receiving excessive irrelevant CSI, so that AP1 obtains accurate measurement information, reducing coordination complexity instructs the second network device to measure only CSI required by the first network device. This eliminates interference caused by receiving excessive irrelevant CSI, so that the first network device obtains accurate measurement information, reducing coordination complexity and reduces feedback overheads (Wang et al., column 10, lines 29-39, column 2, lines 5-22, 45-49).
Claim 22 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 3 above.
10. Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160) in view of Guo et al. (EP 4152799)(reference cited in the 04/18/2028 IDS).
With respect to claim 8, Doostnejad et al. do not disclose: wherein the CSI feedback comprises: performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) of a first channel matrix for the first channel to obtain a first matrix that is a left semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, a second matrix that is a diagonal real matrix, and a third matrix that is a right semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback for the first channel is based on the first matrix, the second matrix, and the third matrix; and performing an SVD of a second channel matrix for the second channel to obtain a fourth matrix that is a left semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, a fifth matrix that is a diagonal real matrix, and a sixth matrix that is a right semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback for the second channel is based on the fourth matrix, the fifth matrix, and the sixth matrix.
In the same field of endeavor, Guo et al. disclose:
wherein a CSI feedback (page 3, lines 25-26 “…feed back CSI by using a beamforming report…BFR”, [0100] [0102], [0105]-[0106]) comprises: performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) ([0102] and related [0100]) of a first channel matrix for a first channel (H11) to obtain a first matrix (per SVD UDV* is obtained, first matrix is U) that is a left semi-unitary or a unitary matrix (per SVD, U is a unitary matrix), a second matrix that is a diagonal real matrix (per SVD, D is a real diagonal matrix), and a third matrix (per SVD, V is right unitary matrix) that is a right semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback for the first channel is based on the first matrix, the second matrix, and the third matrix (page 15, lines 52-56, CSI feed back includes U, D, and V of each small matrix (H11 and H22); and performing an SVD of a second channel matrix for the second channel (same paragraphs as above as relating to matrix H22) to obtain a fourth matrix that is a left semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, a fifth matrix that is a diagonal real matrix, and a sixth matrix that is a right semi-unitary or a unitary matrix, (refer to the matrices obtained by performing SVD on H12) wherein the CSI feedback for the second channel is based on the fourth matrix, the fifth matrix, and the sixth matrix (CSI feedback of U, D, V of H12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad et al. based on the teachings of Guo et al. to include U, D, and V for the first channel matrix and U, D, V for the second channel matrix in the fed back CSI, by performing SVD on the first channel matrix and on the second channel matrix, to allow each of AP1 and AP2 to use the fed back CSI by using a beamforming report (BFR) to support both JT (joint transmission) and CBF (coordinated beamforming) in a subsequent data transmission process (Guo et al., page 15, lines 54-56, [0006] and refer to the description of JT in [0052]-[0053] in particular the last sentence of [0053], and CBF in [0055]-[0056] “The AP1 performs coordinated beamforming according to the CSI…The AP2 performs coordinated beamforming according to the CSI…”and [0057]. Also refer to lines 2-15 of [0032] of Doostnejad et al. disclosing joint beamforming and cooperative (coordinated) beamforming).
With respect to claim 9, wherein: Doostnejad et al. disclose: the one or more packets comprise one or more null data packets (NDPs) received from the first and second wireless nodes (refer to the respective NDP received from AP1 and AP2, lines 15-end of [0066]).
Doostnejad et al. do not disclose: and generating the CSI feedback comprises: generating a composite channel matrix, based on the one or more NDPs, and performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) of the composite channel matrix to obtain a first matrix that is a left semi-unitary or unitary matrix, a second matrix that is a diagonal real matrix, and a third matrix that is a right semi-unitary or unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback is based on at least the second matrix and the third matrix.
In the same field of endeavor, Guo et al. disclose: generating a CSI feedback (CSI using BFR report, oage 3, lines 25-26, page 14, line 23, page 15, line 42) comprises: generating a composite channel matrix ([0100] refer to (1), lines 18-29 on page 14, refer to matrix Hcomp), based on one or more NDPs (page 13, lines 25-26, Fig. 4A, 4B, refer to the NDPs received from AP1 and AP2 and used to perform channel measurement S405, [0058], [00100]), and performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) of the composite channel matrix (page 14, lines 20-25 “…through singular value decomposition..” and lines 57-58 “…obtained through singular value decomposition performed on a matrix Hcomp…”) to obtain a first matrix that is a left semi-unitary or unitary matrix (Ucomp), a second matrix that is a diagonal real matrix (Dcomp), and a third matrix (Vcomp) that is a right semi-unitary or unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback is based on at least the second matrix and the third matrix (CSI using BFR includes information about Dcomp and Vcomp, page 14, lines 21-23, 57-58, page 15, line 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostnejad et al. based on the teachings of Guo et al. regarding generating CSI feedback using BFR for join transmission, to perform generating a composite channel matrix (Hcomp), based on the one or more NDPs, and performing a singular value decomposition (SVD) of the composite channel matrix (Guo et al., page 14, lines 20-24, 57-58, page 15, line 42) to obtain a first matrix (Ucomp) that is a left semi-unitary or unitary matrix, a second matrix (Dcomp) that is a diagonal real matrix, and a third matrix (Vcomp) that is a right semi-unitary or unitary matrix, wherein the CSI feedback is based on at least the second matrix and the third matrix (BFR includes Dcomp and Vcomp) to allow each of AP1 and AP2 of Doostnejad et al. to support joint transmission (JT) in a subsequent data transmission process (Guo et al., refer to description of Joint transmission [0052]-[0054], and in particular “the plurality of Aps need to obtain CSI of each STA in advance, to perform precoding…” , page 14, lines 18-24 and Doostnejad et al. at least lines 2-9 of [0032] refer to the disclosed joint beamforming (transmission), and approximate middle of [0049]).
With respect to claim 10, modified Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the composite channel matrix (Hcomp) is generated based on: a first channel matrix for the first channel (refer to H11 and Fig. 6, page 14, lines 54-57) between the apparatus and the first wireless node; and a second channel matrix for the second channel (H12 and Fig. 6) between the apparatus and the second wireless node (page 14, lines 54-57).
11. Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Doostnejad et al. (US 2020/0213160) in view of Guo et al. (EP 4152799) and further in view of Yu et al. (US 2022/0321301)(reference cited in the 04/18/2028 IDS).
With respect to claim 11, modified Doostnejad et al., disclose: wherein the one or more NDPs comprise a joint NDP that has (e,g, refer to the NDPs out of AP1 and A2 of Fig. 3, the disclosed NDPs comprise a joint NDP, as both NDPs are used by STA11 to generate the feedback report)
Modified Doostnejad et al., Guo et al. do not disclose: that has: one or more fields with same information from both the first and second wireless nodes; and at least one training field with a first subset of one or multiple spatial streams from the first wireless node and a second subset of one or multiple spatial streams from the second wireless node.
In the same field of endeavor, Yu et al. disclose: a joint NDP (NDPs out of least AP1 and AP2 in Fig. 11 are considered to correspond to a joint NDP, [0060], [0199]-[0206] or refer to Fig. 10A and [0186]) that has: one or more fields with same information from both a first and second wireless nodes ([0063], [0213] and Fig. 12C disclosing a structure of a NDP, and refer (for example) to the legacy short training field having the same information (content) from both AP1 and AP2); and at least one training field with a first subset of one or multiple spatial streams from the first wireless node and a second subset ([0213], a value of a number of space-time streams subfield of the NDP as to NDP transmissions of Fig. 11 and for example NSTS (AP1)….NSTS(APK) of Fig. 12A, number of space-time streams and approximate middle of [0186] through the end, relationship between space-time streams and spatial streams, [0116]. Last sentence of [0230] “a quantity of spatial streams on which channel sounding is performed”. At least the EHT-LTF is used to perform channel sounding (estimation) as known in the art) of one or multiple spatial streams from the second wireless node.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Doostenjad et al. based on the teachings of Yu et al. to construct the joint NDP (each of the NDPs out of AP1 and NDP out of AP2) as taught by Yu et al. as shown in Fig. 12C to use a signal format that is suitable for performing channel sounding (estimation) in EHT Wifi ([0073] of Yu et al., [0060]-[0061], [0213]) and Doostnejad et al., lines 1-10 of [0032], [0042]).
With respect to claim 12, modified Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the at least one transceiver (transmit to the processor of the processing circuitry which performs the operations or functions “described herein”, Doostnejad et al., lines 13-17 of [0106], [0161]), information indicating the first subset and the second subset ([0213] and Fig. 12A [0212], a received (transmitted via the transceiver to the processor) trigger frame includes information indicating the first subset (NSTS for AP1) and the second subset (NSTS foe AP2). Alternatively, refer to the approximate first half of [0186], “Optionally, the NDP includes a quantity of access point devices that participate in channel sounding, and/or indicates spatial stream allocation information of each access point device. For example, the NDP may include a number of space-time streams (NSTS) on which each access point device performs channel sounding, for example, an NSTS (AP1) field, an NSTS (AP2) field, and an NSTS (AP3) field).
With respect to claim 13, modified Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the information is received via a NDP announcement (NDPA) frame, or the one or more NDPs (refer to the approximate first half of [0186]).
With respect to claim 14, modified Doostnejad et al. disclose: wherein the information comprises at least one of: a quantity of transmit antennas associated with each of the first and second wireless nodes; or a quantity of streams from each of the first and second wireless nodes ([0186] refer to: “The spatial stream allocation information of each access point device may be used to indicate a quantity of spatial streams of each access point device”. Also, refer to the indicated number of space-time streams (NSTS)).
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 5-7 are 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
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu et al. (US 2023/0096177) refer to Fig. 9, NDP structure, and [0206]-[0208], [0208] discloses: “The EHT-LTF is used for channel estimation”.
Levinbrook et al. (WO 2022/268297) entire document is relevant. Page 14, lines 10-36, page 15, lines 1-9, disclose generating CSI feedback (at a UE) that comprises a first feedback and a second feedback. The first feedback is determined by decomposing (SVD decomposition) the first channel matrix H11 between AP1 and the UE. The second feedback is generated using SVD on a modified (equivalent) channel matrix (B=W1H12) where H12 is the channel matrix between AP2 and the UE to generate the “orthonormal basis” of B.
The second CSI feedback is not based on the fifth (diagonal real matrix) and the sixth matrix (right semi-unitary or unitary matrix, obtained by performing SVD on the equivalent channel matrix, as claimed in the last paragraph of instant claim 5.
“The columns of U and V are orthonormal bases” where U, V are obtained from SVD decomposition of B, but not the real diagonal (the claimed fifth) matrix.
Wikipedia “Singular value decomposition”, March 30, 2020, pp. 1-22 (obtained from The Wayback Machine). Refer to at least page 1, explanation of the matrices UΣV* obtained by SVD factorization of a matrix. Page 3 includes section “The columns of U and V are orthonormal bases”.
Suh et al. (US 2021/0143878) entire document is relevant. Refer to at least [0070] “When joint transmission is being implemented by multiple APs together, the STA is further configured to perform channel aggregation prior to computation and feedback of the singular value decomposition matrices Σ and V. That is, the estimated channel between a STA and all the APs operating together in collaboration mode can be aggregated in each STA before the CSI is fed back for the joint transmission (JT) schedule. The STA thus estimates the channel between itself and all the collaborating APs in combination. Then SVD is performed on this aggregated channel.”
Jiang et al. (US 2021/0044333) similar to cited Doostenjad et al. refer to Fig. 1-3, Fig. 6.
Contact Information
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA VLAHOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5507. The examiner can normally be reached M 8:00-4:00, TWRF 8:00-2:00.
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, SAM K AHN can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
SOPHIA VLAHOS
Examiner
Art Unit 2633
/SOPHIA VLAHOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633 07/23/2026
Prosecution Insights