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 Objections
Claims 6, 7, 14, 15, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In the last line of each of claims 6, 14 and 19, “operation” should be --operations --.
Claims 7, 15 and 20 are objected to as being dependent on claims 6, 14 and 19.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1, 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. (US 20210391967 A1), hereinafter, Gao, in view of Wei et al. (US 20250167860 A1), hereinafter, Wei.
Regarding claim 1:
Gao discloses a method for a user equipment (UE) to perform dynamic point selection (DPS) in a wireless network, the method comprising:
receiving, at the UE, signals from a plurality of transmission and reception points (TRPs) (Paragraph [0110]), wherein different non-zero power (NZP) channel state information (CSI) reference signal (RS) resources are configured for different ones of the plurality of TRPs (Paragraph [0111]);
selecting, at the UE, based on the signals, one or more selected TRP of the plurality of TRPs for multiple TRP (multi-TRP) joint transmission CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0104], [0111]-[0114]);
configuring a CSI-RS resource indicator (CRI) field in the multi-TRP CSI feedback to indicate the one or more selected TRP (Paragraph [0112]); and reporting, from the UE to the wireless network, the multi-TRP CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0111]-[0114]).
Thus Gao discloses all the limitations above, but fails to explicitly disclose CSI feedback is coherent joint transmission (CJT) CSI feedback.
Wei discloses reporting from the UE to the wireless network, the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback (Fig. 8, step 820, Fig. 9, step 920, paragraphs [0104], [0115]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Gao’s CSI feedback be coherent joint transmission CSI feedback as disclosed by Wei, thereby resulting in the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to do so because network using CJT provides high throughput and spectral efficiency.
Regarding claim 9:
Gao discloses a method for a wireless network for dynamic point selection (DPS), the method comprising:
determining that a user equipment (UE) is configured to receive signals from a plurality of transmission and reception points (TRPs) (Paragraphs [0105]- [0110], gNB/base station signals the UE M and N, thus determines it is configured to receive signals from a plurality of TRPs),
configuring different non-zero power (NZP) channel state information (CSI) reference signal (RS) resources for different ones of the plurality of TRPs (Paragraph [0111]);
configuring the UE to generate, based on the signals, multiple TRP (multi-TRP) coherent joint transmission (CJT) CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0104], [0111]-[0114]);
receiving, from the UE, a CSI-RS resource indicator (CRI) field in the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback that indicates one or more selected TRP for the DPS operation (Paragraph [0112]); and
sending, to the UE from the one or more selected TRP, a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) and its demodulation reference signal (DMRS) transmission based on the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0045]-[0050], [0130]-[0132]).
Thus Gao discloses all the limitations above, but fails to explicitly disclose joint transmission CSI feedback is coherent joint transmission (CJT) CSI feedback.
Wei discloses reporting from the UE to the wireless network, the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback (Fig. 8, step 820, Fig. 9, step 920, paragraphs [0104], [0115]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Gao’s CSI feedback be coherent joint transmission CSI feedback as disclosed by Wei, thereby resulting in the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to do so because network using CJT provides high throughput and spectral efficiency.
Regarding claim 17:
Gao discloses a method for a user equipment (UE) to perform dynamic point selection (DPS) in a wireless network, the method comprising:
receiving, at the UE, signals from a plurality of transmission and reception points (TRPs) (Paragraph [0110]),
selecting, at the UE, based on the signals, one or more selected TRP of the plurality of TRPs for multiple TRP (multi-TRP) joint transmission (JT) CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0104], [0111]-[0114]);
generating, at the UE, the multi-TRP JT CSI feedback (Paragraph [0112]) comprising one or more linear combination coefficients to indicate the one or more selected TRP (Paragraph [0113],-[0115], CSI feedback for each selected TRP comprises precoding matrix indicator (PMI), which is an indication of a linear combination of coefficients), i.e. CSI feedback (Paragraph [0112]) comprising one or more linear combination coefficients to indicate the one or more selected TRP );
and reporting, from the UE to the wireless network, the multi-TRP JT CSI feedback (Paragraphs [0111]-[0114]).
Thus Gao discloses all the limitations above, but fails to explicitly disclose CSI JT feedback is coherent joint transmission (CJT) CSI feedback.
Wei discloses reporting from the UE to the wireless network, the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback (Fig. 8, step 820, Fig. 9, step 920, paragraphs [0104], [0115]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Gao’s CSI feedback be coherent joint transmission CSI feedback as disclosed by Wei, thereby resulting in the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to do so because network using CJT provides high throughput and spectral efficiency.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Wei as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Onggosanusi et al. (US 20180175993 A1), hereinafter, Onggosanusi.
Regarding claims 2 and 10:
Gao and Wei disclose all the limitations of claims 1 and 9, but fail to explicitly disclose the method wherein the multi-TRP CJT CSI feedback comprises uplink control information (UCI) in a first CSI part (CSI part 1) and a second CSI part (CSI part 2), and wherein the CRI is reported in the CSI part 1.
However, Onggosanusi discloses a method wherein CSI report comprises uplink control information (UCI) in a first CSI part (CSI part 1) (Fig. 6, 601 is claimed CSI part 1) and a second CSI part (CSI part 2) (Fig. 6, 602 is claimed CSI-part 2), and wherein the CRI is reported in the CSI part 1 (Fig. 6, CRI In 601) (Paragraphs [0138], [0139], Fig. 6 shows UCI codeword, i.e. UCI is in parts 1 and 2 of the CSI report and CRI is in part 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Gao’s CSI feedback report as modified by Wei to comprise uplink control information (UCI) in a first CSI part (CSI part 1) and a second CSI part (CSI part 2), and wherein the CRI is reported in the CSI part 1 as disclosed by Onggosanusi, thereby resulting in the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to do so because this method enables reporting CSI in systems with large number of antenna elements (Paragraph [0012]).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Wei as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Faxer et al. (US 20200395989 A1), hereinafter, Faxer.
Regarding claims 8 and 16:
Gao and Wei disclose all the limitations of claims 1 and 9 above.
Gao further discloses CSI-RS set for channel measurement for each report, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein for each TRP of the plurality of TRPs, the UE is configured by the wireless network with only one of the NZP CSI-RS resources as a channel measurement resource.
However, Faxer discloses UE is configured with a single resource in the NZP-CSI-RS resource set for channel measurement (Paragraph [0156], WD is claimed UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Gao’s method as modified by Wei would would be further modified so that UE is configured with only one of the NZP CSI-RS resources as a channel measurement resource, as disclosed by Faxer thereby resulting in the claimed invention where for each TRP of the plurality of TRPs, the UE is configured by the wireless network with only one of the NZP CSI-RS resources as a channel measurement resource. It would have been obvious because using a single resource saves resources but provides sufficient information for estimating the channel.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 3-7, 11-15, 18-20 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 and if the objections set forth in section 2 above of this office action are overcome.
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Rahamn et al. (US 20180145737 A1) discloses CSI feedback with PMI indicating a linear combination of coefficients.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINEETA S PANWALKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8561. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-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, David C. Payne can be reached at 571-272-3024. 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.
/VINEETA S PANWALKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights