DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 16 Jun 2026 has been entered.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-17 are allowed for the reasons previously provided. Non-final Act., mailed 11 Apr 2024, at pgs. 6-7 (citing amendments made in Rule 111 Reply received 24 Feb 2024). The Examiner notes that the subject matter that triggered the Examiner to find claims 10-17 to be allowable is no longer recited in claim 10. Because the claim description continues to list claim 10 as “previously presented” since the subject matter was removed, the Examiner presumes the omission of the subject matter was in error.
In its forthcoming Rule 111 Reply, the Examiner requests the Applicant to ensure claim 10 will recite the same limitations as claim 10 in the listing, received on 24 Feb 2024.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application is a continuation of a continuation of a US non-provisional application that claims a domestic benefit to a US provisional application, filed 28 Aug 2012.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statements, submitted on 30 Sept 2020, 7 Aug 2025, and 26 Nov 2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The Reply alleges Gaal cannot be cited for teach the “in response to” limitation of claim 1 because “CSI-RS REs are different from CRS REs” and “discounting muted REs or CSI-RS REs is different from ‘assuming PDSCH rate-matching based upon a default CRS RE set included in the plurality of CRS RE sets.’” Reply, 7. The Final Rejection did not cite CSI-RS REs as teaching CRS REs, but rather noted that discounting CSI-RS REs and muted REs “creates multiple RE sets,” where each set includes CRS REs as required by the claimed invention. Final Act., 6; see claim 1 (“CRS RE set included in the plurality of CRS RE sets”). In Gaal, which REs are rate-matched around is defined, in part, by the which muted and CSI-RS REs are discounted. DCI format 1A of Gaal may or may not discount these special purpose REs, such that PDSCH rate matching operation are defined via DCI format 1A and RRC signaling. Gaal, ¶60 (RRC configures downlink transmission mode of UE; Gaal, ¶¶86-89 (DCI format also defines transmission mode, which includes the PDSCH rate matching operation).
The Reply alleges that “the DCI bit in Sorrentino has a different function from the CRS RE signaling field” of the claimed invention. Reply, 7. A different function or purpose does not preclude Sorrentino for teaching the limitations at issue in the claimed invention. The Reply further alleges “[i]n Sorrentino, a CRS RE that is indicated by the DCI bit is no that now carries data intended for the UE during the at least one subframe, rather than CRS.” Reply, 7-8 (emphasis omitted). Sorrentino is cited for teaching a DCI for a subframe that “includes” CRS RE signaling field. Final Act., 6 (see (1)). Sorrentino teaches such a field and the claimed invention does not preclude an RE, reserved for a CRS, that may be used to transmit data.
Lastly, the Reply finds “Sorrentino’s continuous CRS transmission is a baseline network behavior, which is not ‘a default CRS RE set included in the plurality of CRS RE sets’ ‘configured via a radio resource control (RRC) layer.’” Reply, 8 (emphasis added). This argument appears to argue the references individually. Gaal is cited for a CRS RE set included in plurality of sets configured via RRC. Final Act., 6 (citing Gaal, ¶¶60, 86-89, et al.); see also Sorrentino, ¶83 (RRC signaling used to configure REs). Sorrentino is cited for a “default” structure for REs. Final Act., 7. As noted by the Reply, Sorrentino teaches a “baseline network behavior.” Reply, 8. The Examiner contends a baseline behavior is a “default” behavior. And in Sorrentino, this default behavior, i.e. “continuous transmit of CRS over the system bandwidth” is pre-defined and indicated by the DCI format. Sorrentino, ¶¶85-86.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 16 Jun 2026 is acknowledged. The withdrawal of claim 8 is also noted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9, and 18-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gaal (US 20120113917 A1) in view of Sorrentino (US 20150181570).
Regarding claim 1, Gaal teaches a method for determining physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) rate-matching comprising (Fig 2-3, [0008],[0010], discloses a rate matching when transmitting a PDSCH to a UE):
determining, at a user equipment (UE) configured for downlink coordinated multi-point transmission (Gaal, ¶71 and figure 8 – DL CoMP operation facilitated by the resource map of figure 8), whether downlink control information (DCI) for a radio subframe received from a base station . . . (Gaal, ¶70 and figure 8 – configuration identifies REs, including CRS REs that are marked with an “R” in figure 8; Gaal, ¶62 – DCI format defines PDSCH transmission scheme, including CRS-based ones) or indicates a fall-back transmission (Gaal, ¶¶59-60 – DCI format 1A indicates a fallback operation when executing downlink transmissions),
wherein each CRS RE set in a plurality of CRS RE sets configured via a radio resource control (RRC) layer . . . (Gaal, ¶60 – RRC signaling may reconfigure the downlink transmission mode for a UE; Gaal, ¶¶86-87 – transmission mode defines a PDSCH rate matching operation, which creates a CRS RE set, like the one shown in figure 8); and
in response to determining that the DCI indicates the fall-back transmission, performing PDSCH demodulation assuming PDSCH rate-matching based upon a . . . CRS RE set included in the plurality of CRS RE sets (Gaal, ¶¶86-89 – when DCI format 1A is used, PDSCH rate matching may or may not discount muted REs or CSI-RS REs [which creates multiple RE sets]; Gaal, figure 8 – a CRS RE set is shown, where CRS REs are marked with an “R”).
Gaal does not explicitly teach (1) a DCI that “includes a cell-specific reference symbol (CRS) resource element (RE) signaling field,” (2) a “default” CRS RE set, (3) each CRS RE set “is associated with a respective value in the CRS RE signaling field,” or (4) “wherein each CRS RE in the plurality of CRS RE sets corresponds to a CRS antenna port.” However, Sorrentino teaches the following:
(1) a DCI that “includes a cell-specific reference symbol (CRS) resource element (RE) signaling field” (Sorrentino, ¶58 – at least one bit in the DCI is dedicated for indicating which REs are reserved for transmitting at least one CRS and is encoded in the “CRS-information” field),
(2) a “default” CRS RE set (Sorrentino, figure 8a and ¶53 – the network is assumed to transmit CRS continuously in the reserved RE; Sorrentino, ¶86 – the CRS REs are pre-defined and then transmitted by the network in a semi-static fashion, which becomes the default CRS REs),
(3) each CRS RE set configured by RRC “is associated with a respective value in the CRS RE signaling field” (Sorrentino, ¶¶57, 83 – RRC signaling may include the at least one bit, where each bit defines a different CRS RE configuration), and
(4) wherein each CRS RE in the plurality of CRS RE sets corresponds to a CRS antenna port. Sorrentino, figure 2c and ¶¶10, 48, 90 (each antenna port had a different CRS RE mapping configuration).
At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to indicate a CRS RE pattern for CRS ports, as taught by Sorrentino, when executing the PDSCH rate matching, taught by Gaal, in order to enable the UE to operate predictably within the sub-bands where it anticipates continuous transmission of CRS. Sorrentino, ¶93.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino also teaches wherein the default CRS RE set is the serving base station CRS RE set (Sorrentino, figure 8a and ¶53 – the network node is assumed to transmit CRS continuously in the reserved RE; Sorrentino, ¶86 – the CRS REs are pre-defined and then transmitted by the network in a semi-static fashion, which becomes the default CRS REs; Sorrentino, ¶60 – network node serves the UE).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino also teaches wherein the fall-back transmission is on a compact downlink control information (DCI) format (Gaal, [0059], [0060], discloses DCI format 1A used with fallback operation, as a result, the communication between the eNB and UE can be performed without any interruption).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino also teaches wherein the DCI format is fall-back scheduling on a DCI 1A format (Gaal, [0059],[0060], [0085], discloses DCI format 1A used with fallback operation).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino also teaches determining a value of a CRS resource element (RE) signaling field in a downlink control information (DCI) signal received from a base station (Gaal, Fig 3, [0055]-[0057], discloses a transmission mode received by a UE; Gaal, [0086], [0088], PDSCH rate matching operations scheduled via DCI format, a TX mode-dependent DCI format ( 1, 1B, 1D, 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, etc.) would be considered as a value of a CRS RE (Gaal, [0038], including CRS) signaling field ); and
in response to the DCI signal indicating that no fall-back transmission is received, performing PDSCH demodulation (Gaal, [0064], discloses a DM-RS for demodulation) assuming rate-matching based upon a CRS RE set corresponding to the value in the CRS RE signaling field in the DCI signal (Gaal, [0062], [0086], the mode-dependent DCI format [i.e. any format other than 1A] associated with a particular PDSCH transmission scheme, and the rate-matching performed differently based on the value; Sorrentino, ¶58 – each value of the bit in the DCI represents a different CRS pattern).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino also teaches wherein the CRS RE signaling field includes n bits, where n ≥ 2 (Sorrentino, ¶58 – at least one bit [i.e. 2 or more are within this range] in the DCI is dedicated for indicating which REs are reserved for transmitting at least one CRS and is encoded in the “CRS-information” field).
Claim 18 is the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 1 respectively, and rejected under the same rationale set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 1 respectively above. In addition, Gaal teaches UE with receiver and processor (Fig 6).
Claim 19 is the apparatus claim corresponding to method claims 6 and 9 respectively, and rejected under the same rationale set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 6 and 9 respectively above.
Claim 20 is the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 2, and rejected under the same rationale set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 2 respectively above.
Claims 3 and 7 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Gaal (US 20120113917 A1) in view of Sorrentino (US 20150181570) and further in view of Yue (US 20140044061 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the default CRS RE set is a CRS RE set associated with a value 0 in the CRS RE signaling field. However, Yue teaches a CRS RE pattern that is associated with a value of zero. Yue, ¶¶25, 150, and tables 3 and 4 – “00”).
At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use the 2-bit mapping indicator, as taught by Yue, in as the one or more bits in the DCI, as taught by the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino, in order to dynamically or semi-statically signal the CRS mapping pattern. Yue, ¶128 and ¶147.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Gaal and Sorrentino teaches the method of claim 1 and . . . a plurality of cells in a CoMP transmission system. Gaal, ¶67 (CoMP operation with PDSCH muting configurations). The combination of Gaal and Sorrentino does not explicitly teach “wherein the each CRS RE set of the plurality of CRS RE sets corresponds to a respective cell.” However, in a CoMP operation (Yue, title), Yue teaches a plurality of CRS RE sets, where each set is indicated by a given indicator. Yue, ¶118 (each mapping indicator is associated with a different TP); Yue, ¶153 and table 4 (each mapping indicator creates a “set” of CRS REs).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, including paragraph 60 of Xiao, which teaches a pre-defined set of REs for CRS, and paragraph 225 of Zirwas, which teaches CRSs for antenna ports 0 and 1 being transmitted continuously for fall-back.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571)270-7514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm EST.
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.
/Benjamin Lamont/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights