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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 20 April 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 20 April 2026, has been entered and carefully considered.
Claims 1, 9 and 17 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
The outstanding objection to Claims 1, 9 and 17 is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to said claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant states the following with regards to the outstanding rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b): “Independent claims 1, 9, and 17 have been amended to overcome the rejections.” However, Applicant has not provided any further remarks as to the patentability of the claims under this statute. The Office notes that the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is maintained, as explained in the rejection herein.
Applicant's arguments filed 20 April 2026 regarding the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first states the following (refer to page 11 of Applicant’s response):
“Shin fails to disclose determining first information indicating that N consecutive time units are configured for sending a first message in a joint transmission manner, wherein the joint transmission manner requires maintaining power consistency and phase continuity across the N consecutive time units, wherein the N consecutive time units comprise P unavailable time units, as claimed.”
The Office respectfully disagrees. The Office first notes Shin is not relied upon for the “power consistency and phase continuity” limitations related to the “joint transmission manner”, which are mapped to Hasegawa. Further, the Office notes that the claim language solely describes what the first information indicates, and does not provide further description of how the first information is “determined.” As such, Shin’s disclosure is consistent on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, as currently drafted. Specifically, Shin discloses determining a number of DMRS front-loaded symbols (Figure 5 at 500), where various configurations of DMRS symbols are provided in the cited Figure 3D.
Applicant further states (refer to page 12 of Applicant’s response):
“However, Hasegawa does not send or receive the first message in the joint transmission manner in M consecutive time units, wherein power consistency and phase continuity are maintained across the M consecutive time units.”
The Office respectfully disagrees. The Office first notes that the manner in which power consistency and phase continuity is “maintained” is not claimed. As noted in the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) herein, these concepts are also not clearly described in Applicant’s disclosure, so as to allow one of ordinary skill in the art to ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim language. Therefore, as best understood by the Office, Hasegawa’s disclosure of the WTRU keeping DMRS bundling enabled (e.g., maintaining phase and power continuity) for uplink transmissions (i.e., messages sent from the UE) across consecutive slots, as described in paragraph 0160, meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. The remaining limitations noted by Applicant as not being disclosed by Hasegawa are instead mapped to Shin in the outstanding rejection. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore, the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 9 and 17 recite the phrase “phase continuity.” However, this phrase does not appear in the specification, as originally filed. Although the specification refers to phases being consecutive, there is no description provided as to the term “phase continuity.” Therefore, this language constitutes new matter. Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 fail to resolve the deficiencies described above for the independent claims, and are therefore also rejected by virtue of dependence on the independent claims.
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 1-20 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.
Regarding independent Claims 1, 9, and 17, the claim language recites “wherein the joint transmission manner requires maintaining power consistency and phase continuity across the N consecutive time units, ” as well as maintaining power consistency and phase continuity across M consecutive time units. Regarding the phrase “maintaining power consistency,” it is not clear what the phrase “power consistency” is intended to mean based on the claim language or the specification. The claim language does not further limit the term “consistency” and the specification does not describe “power consistency.” While the specification describes “power control consistency” during a particular duration of N slots (refer to paragraph 0676), it is not clear that consistency of “power control” is the same as the more broadly claimed “power consistency.” A plain meaning of the term “consistency” includes “the quality of always behaving or performing in a similar way, or of always happening in a similar way” (refer to provided definitions of “consistency” from Cambridge Dictionary). As such, the degree to which “power consistency” would be “maintained” is not clear from a review of the claim language or specification. Regarding the phrase “phase continuity,” the scope of this phrase is also unclear. This phrase is not further defined in the claim and does not appear in the specification, as originally filed (refer to the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) herein). Therefore, the scope of the phrase “phase continuity”, or the degree to which it is “maintained,” cannot be ascertained via the claim language or Applicant’s specification. Claims 1, 9 and 17 are therefore found to be indefinite.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 fail to resolve the deficiencies described above for the independent claims, and are therefore also rejected by virtue of dependence on the independent claims.
For examination purposes related to search and prior art, the claims will be addressed as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication US 2019/0200326), hereinafter Shin, in view of Hasegawa et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0291523), hereinafter Hasegawa.
Regarding Claim 9, Shin discloses an apparatus comprising:
a memory configured to store instruction (paragraphs 0350-352, a terminal and a base station comprise storage media that stores instructions); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to (Figures 7-8 and paragraphs 0350-352, a terminal (Figure 7, processor 730) and a base station (Figure 8, processor 830) comprise processors):
determine first information indicating that N consecutive time units are configured for sending a first message in a joint transmission manner, wherein the N consecutive time units comprise P unavailable time units (utilizing legend in Figure 3A; Figure 3D, configuration c64 – symbols 0-2 are PDCCH (unavailable)), wherein N is an integer greater than 2 (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – N consecutive symbols are utilized for transmission/reception; paragraph 0074 for description of possible DMRS positions; Figure 5 at step 500 and paragraph 0307 – a process for determining the number of front-loaded DMRS symbols is described), wherein P is an integer greater than 0 (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – 3 symbols are allocated for PDCCH); and
send or receive the first message in M consecutive time units (utilizing legend in Figure 3A; paragraph 0074 and Figure 3D, configuration c64 – DMRS is allocated to consecutive symbols),
wherein the M consecutive time units are a part of the N consecutive time units and do not comprise the P unavailable time units (Figure 3D, configuration c64, the symbols for DMRS (3-4) are separate from the symbols for PDCCH (0-2)),
wherein M is an integer greater than 1 (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – 2 symbols are allocated for DMRS).
However, Shin does not disclose sending or receiving the first message in the joint transmission manner, wherein the joint transmission manner requires maintaining power consistency and phase continuity across the N consecutive time units, or wherein power consistency and phase continuity are maintained across the M consecutive time units. In an analogous art, Hasegawa discloses this. Specifically, Hasegawa discloses DMRS bundling (joint transmission) by maintaining phase and power continuity across PUSCH transmissions, uplink data symbols and uplink DMRS symbols) until a specified or configured resource (e.g., a last slot of N consecutive slots) is used (paragraph 0160). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shin and Hasegawa. One would have been motivated to do so in order to enhance channel estimation performance and avoid data degradation (refer to paragraph 0003 of Hasegawa).
Claim 1 is a method claim comprising the same limitations as the functions performed by the apparatus of Claim 9. Therefore, Claim 1 is rejected using the same rationale as presented above for Claim 9.
Claim 17 is directed to a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions that are stored on a non-transitory storage medium that, when executed by a processor, cause an apparatus to perform the same functions as Claim 9. Shin further discloses a computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions that are stored on a non-transitory storage medium that, when executed by a processor (paragraphs 0350-352, a terminal and a base station comprise storage media that stores instructions) to perform the functions detailed above with regards to Claim 9. The remaining limitations are rejected using the same rationale as presented for Claim 9 above.
Regarding Claims 2 and 10, Shin discloses the at least one processor (mapped in Claim 9 rejection above) is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to further send or receive the first message in the joint transmission manner in the M consecutive time units (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – DMRS is allocated in consecutive symbols), wherein the first information comprises configuration information, and wherein the configuration information comprises at least one of: a first value of N; at least one first demodulation reference signal pattern corresponding to a second value of N (Figure 3D, configuration c64, DMRS allocation, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation); a third value of M; at least one second demodulation reference signal pattern corresponding to a fourth value; or a first frequency hopping parameter for sending the first message.
Regarding Claims 3 and 11, Shin discloses the M consecutive time units are either located after the P unavailable time units or located before the P unavailable time units (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – the DMRS allocation (M) is located after the PDCCH allocation (P), therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation).
Regarding Claims 4 and 12, Shin discloses the P unavailable time units are downlink slots (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – symbols 0-2 are allocated for PDCCH).
Regarding Claims 5, 13, and 19, Shin discloses the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to further send or receive the first message in an independent transmission manner in a first time unit, wherein the first time unit is at least one of the N consecutive time units, is different from the P unavailable time units, and is non-consecutive to the M consecutive time units, and wherein the independent transmission manner is different from the joint transmission manner (paragraph 0074 and Figure 3D, configuration c64 – an additional DMRS is transmitted at symbols 10-11 (part of the total symbol allocation (N) and separate from the PDCCH allocation (P)).
Regarding Claims 6 and 14, Shin discloses the first time unit is located after the P unavailable time units (paragraph 0074 and Figure 3D, configuration c64 – an additional DMRS is transmitted at symbols 10-11 (after from the PDCCH allocation (P)).
Regarding Claims 7, 15 and 20, Shin discloses the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to determine unavailable slots as the P unavailable time units due to a dynamic slot format indication or an uplink cancellation indication (paragraphs 0148-0151 – slot format information can be configured and notified to the terminal, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation).
Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Shin discloses the first message comprises uplink data channel information or uplink control channel information (Paragraph 0164, PUSCH (i.e., uplink data channel information) DMRS, therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation).
Regarding Claim 18, Shin discloses the computer-executable instructions further cause the apparatus to further send or receive the first message in the joint transmission manner in the M consecutive time units (utilizing legend in Figure 3A; paragraph 0074 and Figure 3D, configuration c64 – DMRS is allocated to consecutive symbols), wherein the M consecutive time units are either located after the P unavailable time units or located before the P unavailable time units (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – the DMRS allocation (M) is located after the PDCCH allocation (P), therefore meeting the claimed alternative limitation), and wherein the P unavailable time units are downlink slots (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – symbols 0-2 are allocated for PDCCH).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Wei et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 20240023080) is directed to power consistency for uplink DMRS bundling.
Xu et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 20230027316) is directed to DMRS time domain bundling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW W. CHRISS whose telephone number is (571)272-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-4pm ET.
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, Kevin Bates can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/ANDREW W CHRISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights