DETAILED ACTION
In response to communication filed on 3/8/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-3,12-14 and 20 are rejected.
Claims 4-11, and 15-20 are objected to for having allowable subject matter.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/29/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitation “the fifth time domain” but appears to further limit the limitation “the fifth time domain position.” 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.
Claim 20 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 20 recites the limitations "the fifth reference signal,” “the seventh reference signal,” "the ninth reference signal,” “the fourth time domain position,” and “fifth time domain” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim and appears that claim 20 as drafted is supposed to depend upon claim 15, but depends upon claim 12.
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 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-3 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (US Pub. 2019/0273 in view of Nilsson et al. (US Pub. 2021/0368456)(N1 hereafter).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, D1 teaches a signal transmission method [refer Abstract], the method comprises:
obtaining, by a terminal from a network device, first information (i.e. control message to agree on information such as pilot sequence and pilot pattern location)[paragraph 0214], the first information is usable to indicate the terminal to use a first pilot pattern or a second pilot pattern [paragraph 0192](different pilot interpolation patterns can be used)[paragraph 0299],
the first pilot pattern (i.e. CSI-RS pilot design pattern)[refer Fig. 12][paragraph 0281] is usable to indicate that a first reference signal (i.e. pilot symbol, which can be a reference signal)[paragraph 0278] is located at a first time domain position (i.e. pilot location at the fourth time domain position)[paragraph 0283][refer Fig. 12; BeamN+1 Antenna ports 0 to 3], and a second reference signal (i.e. another pilot symbol) is located at a second time domain position (the pilot locations can be spaced in specific symbols or locations, such as at the fifth pilot location)[paragraph 0282][refer Fig. 12; BeamN+1 Antenna ports 0 to 3];
the second pilot pattern (i.e. DMRS pilot design)[paragraph 0286][refer Fig. 13] is usable to indicate indicates that a third reference signal (i.e. pilot symbol) is located at the first time domain position (i.e. pilot location at the fourth time domain position)[refer Fig. 13; Antenna port 4/5/6/7], and a fourth reference signal is located at a third time domain position (i.e. pilot location at third location)[paragraph 0286][refer Fig. 13; Antenna port 4/5/6/7];
a time domain interval (i.e. spacing) between the first time domain position and the second time domain position is greater than (i.e. after) a time domain interval between the first time domain position and the third time domain position [paragraph 0286][refer Fig. 12; BeamN+1 Antenna ports 0 to 3][refer Fig. 13; Antenna port 4/5/6/7]; and
sending, by the terminal to the network device, a signal (i.e. information related to the interpolation parameter)[paragraph 0191] corresponding to the first pilot pattern or the second pilot pattern [paragraph 0292].
However, K1 fails to disclose a value corresponding to the first reference signal in a first precoding sequence (i.e. precoding matrix)[paragraph 0149] is opposite to a value corresponding to the third reference signal in a second precoding sequence (i.e. precoding matrix)[paragraph 0149].
N1 discloses that synchronization signal blocks (i.e. reference signals) can be given a specific order in a burst in which a particular sequence of SSB can have a different polarization mapping to the SSBs [paragraph 0050].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of D1 for defining pilot symbol or reference signal patterns [refer D1; paragraph 0278] to incorporate different polarization mappings to a reference signal, such as an SSB taught by N1. One would be motivated to do so to provide a means of reducing erroneous connection due to polarization mismatch [refer N1; paragraph 0038].
Regarding claims 2 and 13, D1 the obtaining, by the terminal, first information includes obtaining the first information comprises that includes the first precoding sequence or the second precoding sequence [paragraph 0214], the first precoding sequence corresponds to the first pilot pattern, and the second precoding sequence corresponds to the second pilot pattern [paragraph 0214](different pilot interpolation patterns can be used)[paragraph 0299].
Regarding claims 3 and 14, D1 teaches obtaining, by the terminal, first information includes obtaining the first information indicates usable to indicate a first mode (i.e. configurations allow for a device to perform blind detection based upon pilot patterns corresponding to different interpolation configurations [paragraph 0192], such as for a CSI-RS pattern [paragraph 0281]) or a second mode (i.e. interpolation parameters for DMRS pattern)[paragraph 0284], the first mode is usable to indicate the terminal to use the first pilot pattern, and the second mode is usable to indicate the terminal to use the second pilot pattern (indication information of the interpolation parameter is sent to the receive end to perform detection based on the pilot pattern)[paragraph 0192].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-11, and 15-19 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.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to disclose or reasonably suggest that first information that is usable to indicate that the first pilot pattern is further usable to indicate that a fifth reference signal is located at a fourth time domain position, and a sixth reference signal is located at a fifth time domain position, the second pilot pattern is further usable to indicate that a seventh reference signal is located at the fourth time domain position, an eighth reference signal is located at the fifth time domain position, and a ninth reference signal is located at the second time domain position, in the first precoding sequence, the value corresponding to the first reference signal is the same as a value corresponding to the fifth reference signal, and in the second precoding sequence, the value corresponding to the third reference signal is opposite to a value corresponding to the seventh reference signal, as indicated in claims 4,6,15, and 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zach et al. (US Pub. 2021/0328847) discloses that a reference signal may include pilots arranged in a first pilot pattern, and another reference signal including pilots arranged in a second pilot pattern different from the first [paragraph 0113].
Lu et al. (US Pub. 2020/0305137) discloses that reference signal configuration information can be used to denote a resource location, such as location in time domain and can be referred to as a pilot pattern [paragraph 0203].
Xia et al. (US Pub. 2015/0222347) disclose configurating a first and second CSI-RS pilot pattern for a UE to be allocated a first and second access point set respectively [refer Abstract].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN C KAVLESKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3619. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-3pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 571-270-7191. 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.
Ryan Kavleski
/R. K./
Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412