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 .
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 10 December 2025), Claims 1-3 are pending.
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 10 December 2025), Claims 1-3 are amended and said amendments are narrowing and supported by the originally-filed Specification (Specification, 10 December 2025, ¶47).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objections of Claims 1-3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of Claims 1-3 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the CRC bit, when the DCI indicates the aperiodic SRS transmission without an UL-SCH and without a CSI request, is scrambled by a second RNTI”. Here, the recitation of “an UL-SCH” is not supported by antecedent basis and should be amended to “the . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “when the DCI indicates”. Examiner reminds Applicant that "[the] broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met", See MPEP 2111.04 and See Ex Parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2015-007421 (Jan. 31, 2016). Here, the contingent limitation, (i.e. “when the DCI indicates”) is not a condition that is required to occur, therefore the entire limitation is not required to occur. Given that the limitation is not required to occur, said limitation does not possess patentable weight. Examiner has, in the interest of compact prosecution, treated the limitation. In order to clarify the claim, Examiner respectfully suggests amending “when the DCI indicates” to “in response to the DCI indicating”. 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.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okamura et al. (US 20230155774 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Okamura”) in view of Wang et al. (US 20230328698 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Wang”).
Regarding Claim 1, Okamura discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising:
reception circuitry (¶136 & Fig. 9 & Claim 1, Okamura discloses a user terminal, such as a user equipment (UE), comprising a transmitting/receiving section 220) configured to receive downlink control information (DCI) (¶9 & ¶31 & Fig. 1 & Claim 1, Okamura discloses receiving, by the UE, downlink control information (DCI)) for an aperiodic sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission (¶9 & ¶31 & Fig. 1 & Claim 1, Okamura discloses that the received DCI includes a sounding reference signal (SRS) Request Field that further indicates a triggering to transmit an aperiodic sounding reference signal (A-SRS)); and
transmission circuitry (¶136 & Fig. 9 & Claim 1, Okamura discloses the UE comprising a transmitting/receiving section 220) configured to transmit aperiodic sounding reference signals (¶31 & Fig. 1 & Claim 1, Okamura discloses transmitting, by the UE, aperiodic sounding reference signals (A-SRS)) wherein:
a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bit, when the DCI indicates the aperiodic SRS transmission for scheduling an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH) and/or triggering a channel state information (CSI) report, is scrambled by a first radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) (¶40 & Fig. 1 (Case 1-1), Okamura discloses that a cyclic redundancy check (CRC), when the DCI indicates the triggering of an aperiodic sounding reference signal (A-SRS) and the transmission of at least one of an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH) and an aperiodic channel state information (A-CSI) report, is scrambled with any one of a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI), CS-RNTI, and/or MCS-RNTI), and
the CRC bit, when the DCI indicates the aperiodic SRS transmission without an UL-SCH and without a CSI request, is scrambled by a second RNTI (¶41 & Fig. 1 (Case 2-2), Okamura discloses that a cyclic redundancy check (CRC), when the DCI indicates the triggering of an aperiodic sounding reference signal (A-SRS) and the transmission without at least one of the UL-SCH and the A-CSI report, is scrambled with SP-CSI-RNTI), different from the first RNTI (¶40-41, Okamura discloses that that the SP-CSI-RNTI is different from any one of the C-RNTI, CS-RNTI, and/or MCS-RNTI).
However, Okamura does not disclose transmitting aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI.
Wang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI (¶47 & ¶112-113 & Fig. 14 (1404), Wang discloses transmitting aperiodic sounding reference signals (A-SRS) in a slot indicated by the slot offset of the DCI).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okamura by transmitting aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI as taught by Wang because the flexibility sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission is improved by enabling a base station to trigger, or overwrite previous triggering, of SRS transmission (Wang, ¶94).
Regarding Claim 2, Okamura discloses a base station apparatus comprising:
transmission circuitry (¶117-121 & Fig. 8 & Claim 6, Okamura discloses a base station (BS) comprising a transmitting/receiving section 120) configured to transmit downlink control in- formation (DCI) (¶49 & Fig. 1 & Claim 8, Okamura discloses transmitting, by the BS to a user equipment (UE), downlink control information (DCI)) for an aperiodic sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission (¶62-65 & Fig. 4 & ¶49-51 & Fig. 1 & Claim 8, Okamura discloses that a sounding reference signal (SRS) Request Field of the DCI indicates a sounding reference signal (SRS) resource set for use in transmitting the SRS); and
reception circuitry (¶117-121 & Fig. 8 & Claim 6, Okamura discloses the BS comprising a transmitting/receiving section 120) configured to receive aperiodic sounding reference signals, wherein:
a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bit, when the DCI indicates the aperiodic SRS transmission for scheduling an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH) and/or triggering a channel state information (CSI) report, is scrambled by a first radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) (¶40 & Fig. 1 (Case 1-1), Okamura discloses that a cyclic redundancy check (CRC), when the DCI indicates the triggering of an aperiodic sounding reference signal (A-SRS) and the transmission of at least one of an uplink shared channel (UL-SCH) and an aperiodic channel state information (A-CSI) report, is scrambled with any one of a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI), CS-RNTI, and/or MCS-RNTI), and
the CRC bit, when the DCI indicates the aperiodic SRS transmission without an UL-SCH and without a CSI request, is scrambled by a second RNTI (¶41 & Fig. 1 (Case 2-2), Okamura discloses that a cyclic redundancy check (CRC), when the DCI indicates the triggering of an aperiodic sounding reference signal (A-SRS) and the transmission without at least one of the UL-SCH and the A-CSI report, is scrambled with SP-CSI-RNTI), different from the first RNTI (¶40-41, Okamura discloses that that the SP-CSI-RNTI is different from any one of the C-RNTI, CS-RNTI, and/or MCS-RNTI).
However, Okamura does not disclose receiving aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI.
Wang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches receiving aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI (¶47 & ¶112-113 & Fig. 14 (1404), Wang discloses transmitting aperiodic sounding reference signals (A-SRS) in a slot indicated by the slot offset of the DCI).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okamura by receiving aperiodic reference signals in a slot that is determined based on an SRS timing offset indicated in the DCI as taught by Wang because the flexibility sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission is improved by enabling a base station to trigger, or overwrite previous triggering, of SRS transmission (Wang, ¶94).
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 1.
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474