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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 31 October 2025, has been entered and carefully considered.
Claims 1, 2, 9, 10, 16 and 17 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
The outstanding objection to Claim 16 is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to said claim.
The outstanding rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment to Claims 1, 9 and 17.
Although Applicant’s amendment to Claims 1, 9 and 17 does resolve the issues previously identified in the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), these claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to issues introduced by the amended claim language.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 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, 9, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims now recite “wherein the joint transmission manner in M consecutive time units meets at least one of power control parameters are consistent in the M consecutive time units or phases are consecutive in the M consecutive time units.” However, the Office recommends that Applicant amends this phrase to ensure proper grammar. Specifically, the phrases “meets at least one of power control parameters are consistent…” and “meets at least one of…phases are consecutive…” are not clearly worded.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 (emphasis added) ““wherein the joint transmission manner in M consecutive time units meets at least one of power control parameters are consistent in the M consecutive time units or phases are consecutive in the M consecutive time units.” Regarding the phrase “power control parameters are consistent”, it is not clear what the phrase “consistent” is intended to mean based on the claim language or the specification. The claim language does not further limit the term “consistent.” While the specification recites this term multiple times (e.g., at paragraph 0013) in association with joint transmission, no further context is provided so as to ascertain what is meant by consistent. A plain meaning of the term “consistent” includes “tending to be arbitrarily close to the true value of the parameter estimated as the sample becomes large” (refer to provided definitions of “consistent” from Mirriam Webster). As such, the degree to which the power control parameters would need to be “consistent” in the M consecutive time slots is not clear from a review of the claim language or specification. Regarding the phrase “phases are consecutive,” the scope of this phrase is also unclear. Similar to “consistent,” the term “consecutive” is recited multiple times throughout the specification (e.g., “phases are consecutive”), but no further context is provided (e.g., whether values of the phase are consecutive, the same (or offset) phase is used in consecutive timeslots). Therefore, the scope of the phrase “phases are consecutive” is unclear and these claims are 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 N is an integer greater than 2 (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – N consecutive symbols are utilized for transmission/reception); 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 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 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),
wherein P is an integer greater than 0 (Figure 3D, configuration c64 – 3 symbols are allocated for PDCCH).
However, Shin does not disclose sending or receiving the first message in the joint transmission manner or wherein the joint transmission manner in M consecutive time units meets at least one of power control parameters are consistent in the M consecutive time units or phases are consecutive in the M consecutive time units. In an analogous art, Hasegawa discloses this. Specifically, Hasegawa discloses DMRS bundling (joint transmission) over continuous uplink slots, where phase and power continuity (i.e., consistent power control parameters and consecutive phases) are maintained (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:
Ly et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0116892) discloses maintaining phase continuity across a set of PUCCHs (paragraph 0077).
TAHERZADEH BOROUJENI (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0224475) requiring phase continuity/coherence for DMRS bundling (paragraph 0088).
Yi et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2022/0224456) discloses phase continuity of PUSCH transmissions for joint channel estimation (paragraph 0065).
Ly et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0421327) discloses power-consistent and phase-continuous DMRS (paragraph 0027).
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 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