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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 – 4, 7, 13 – 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites of “second compressed channel information” in line 33. It is not clear whether the recited “second compressed channel information” refers to the recited “compressed second channel information” of lines 14 and 16 or to a different compressed channel information. The same rejection applies to claim 13.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the third channel information is the first channel information and the second channel information; and a compression method used by the first device to compress the first channel information is the same as or different from a compression method used by the first device to compress the second channel information.”. According to claim 1, wherein the compression method used by the first device to compress the first channel information corresponds to the first compression method and the compression method used by the first device to compress the second channel information corresponds to the second compression method, where the second compression method is different from the first compression method. Therefore, it is not clear whether the (first) compression method used by the first device to compress the first channel information is the same as or different from the (second) compression method used by the first device to compress the second channel information. The same rejection applies to claim 17.
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 9 – 10 and 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al (US 2026/0046218) in view of Abebe et al (US 2023/0412227).
Re claim 9, Dong teaches of a channel information processing method, wherein the method comprises: receiving, by a second device (Network device, NW, Fig.8), fourth channel information sent by a first device, wherein the fourth channel information comprises: first channel information and second channel information (non-compressed and compressed CSI feedback, Fig.8); and decompressing, by the second device, the fourth channel information by using a target decompression method (decompression, Fig.8 and Paragraph 0459); wherein the second channel information is compressed channel information obtained by compressing the first channel information using a first compression method (non-compressed and compressed CSI feedback, Fig.8). Dong does not specifically teach of wherein the fourth channel information comprises any one of the following: first channel information and compressed second channel information; compressed first channel information and second channel information; and compressed first channel information and compressed second channel information.
Abebe teaches of wherein the fourth channel information comprises of a quantized (compressed) compressed first channel information (Fig.12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have compressed the first channel information and second channel information so as to reduce overhead and maximize system throughput.
Re claim 10, Dong teaches of wherein the decompressing, by the second device (Network device, NW, Fig.8), the fourth channel information by using a target decompression method comprises: decompressing, by the second device (Network device, NW, Fig.8) based on a decompression parameter configured by a third device (AI entity, Fig.8 and Paragraph 0055), the fourth channel information by using the target decompression method (decompression, Fig.8 and Paragraph 0459); wherein the third device comprises at least one of the following: a core network node, an access network node, and a third-party node (AI entity, Fig.8 and Paragraph 0055).
Re claim 19, Dong teaches of a communication device (Fig.2), comprising at least one hardware processor (#220, Fig.2) and a memory (#222, Fig.2), wherein the memory stores a program or an instruction that can run on the processor, and when the program or the instruction is executed by the processor, steps of the channel information processing method according to claim 9 are implemented (Paragraphs 0023 – 0024).
Re claim 20, Dong teaches of wherein the execution further causes the communication device to: decompress, based on a decompression parameter configured by a third device, the fourth channel information by using the target decompression method, wherein the third device comprises at least one of the following: a core network node, an access network node, and a third-party node (see claim 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 2, 5 – 6, 8, 11 – 12, 15 – 16 and 18 are allowed.
Claims 3 – 4, 7, 13 – 14 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARISTOCRATIS FOTAKIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
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.
/ARISTOCRATIS FOTAKIS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights