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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Dhakal does not expressly disclose “receive a first control signal that indicates a set of delay values corresponding to a set of antenna ports.” Applicant argues that Dhakal only teaches “receiving radio communication signals” and “a network configuring reference signals, i.e. SRS” (Pp. 10-11). Applicant further argues that “the configuration of reference signal parameters… do not teach delay values (P. 11),” but concedes that the parameters can include periodicity and timing and that here is also a propagation delay (related to channel properties instead of control signals).
The test is not of whether the precise words are expressly used, nor of what is in the specification. Rather, it is of the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims in light of any definitions and of the knowledge of ordinary skill in the art. The claim language is broad, allowing for a number of configurations and possibilities. For example, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that SRS is used to configure UEs based on traffic (as Dhakal uses it) and thus would count as control signals. Likewise, the usage of a symbol “denoting the delay associated with a user” would be seen as a delay value, even if the term “value” isn’t expressly used. If the applicant wishes for a narrower interpretation, they may be free to amend the claims. Also, the applicant is supposed to evaluate the art as a whole, which means that other elements may be relevant (i.e. Para 47).
In this case, Dhakal teaches the usage of both SRS and RRC messages, both of which are used to control tasks, i.e. received to configure the UE (Para 50), and both are tied towards a set of values related to traffic, cell conditions, etc. Later Paragraphs flesh out what the parameters related to periodicity and timing actually are. Paras 70-72 make clear that they are delay values, but there are other sections regarding control (Para 43) or delay (Para 87).
Therefore, the rejection is maintained. This action is final.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-8, 10-14, 16-17, 20-22, 24-27, 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dhakal et al. (2025/0,105,962) in view of Ali et al. (12,494,881).
For claims 1, 16, 29, and 30, Dhakal teaches a user equipment (UE) (Para 37), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code (Para 214); and one or more processors (Para 211) coupled with the one or more memories (Paras 203-204) and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE (abstract; background, summary and claims; Paras 20-35) to:
receive a first control signal (Para 50) that indicates a set of delay values (Paras 70-72) corresponding to a set of antenna ports (Para 220);
receive a first reference signal (Para 51) that has a first delay (Para 54) profile (Para 144), wherein the first reference signal is a multi-port reference signal or is associated with the multi-port reference signal (Para 220; 2 antenna ports);
determine a second delay profile for a demodulation reference signal (Paras 23- 24) based at least in part on the first delay profile of the first reference signal, the set of delay values, and an antenna port (Para 220) mapping (Para 43, 59) between the multi- port reference signal and a set of demodulation reference signals, wherein the set of demodulation reference signals comprises the demodulation reference signal; and
perform a channel estimation (Paras 47-49) on the demodulation reference signal based at least in part on the set of delay values and the second delay profile (Paras 78, 87).
Dhakal does not expressly disclose mapping between the multi-port reference signal and a set of demodulation reference signals, wherein the set of demodulation reference signals comprises the demodulation reference signal. Ali teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims; col 2, line 45 - col. 7, line 5) that includes mapping (col. 14, lines 30-65) between the multi-port reference signal (col. 19, lines 55-67) and a set of demodulation reference signals (col. 11, lines 15-40), wherein the set of demodulation reference signals comprises the demodulation reference signal, building into channel estimation (col. 14, lines 1-30). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Ali in order to provide improvements to the use of DMRS in channel estimation (col. 1, lines 45-60).
For claims 2, 17, Dhakal teaches that to receive the multi-port reference signal via the set of antenna ports, wherein the first reference signal is the multi-port reference signal (Para 220).
For claim 5, Dhakal teaches to map the multi-port reference signal to the set of demodulation reference signals based at least in part on the set of delay values (Paras 60, 79).
For claims 6, 20, Dhakal teaches that the first control signal indicates the set of delay values from a plurality of sets of delay values (Paras 125-126).
For claims 7, 21, Dhakal teaches to receive a second control signal indicating a plurality of sets of delay values, wherein the first control signal indicates the set of delay values from the plurality of sets of delay values (Paras 70, 107).
For claims 8, 22, Dhakal teaches to receive the demodulation reference signal via an antenna port of the set of antenna ports (Para 220), wherein performing the channel estimation (Paras 47-49) is based at least in part on a delay value of the set of delay values corresponding to the antenna port and the second delay profile of the demodulation reference signal (Paras 78, 87).
For claims 10, 24, Dhakal teaches wherein:
receive data signaling via the set of antenna ports (Para 45); and
decode the data signaling based at least in part on performing the channel estimation on the demodulation reference signal (Para 43).
For claims 11, 25, Dhakal teaches to receive the demodulation reference signal based at least in part on the set of delay values (Paras 78, 87) and a quantity of layers of the demodulation reference signal (Paras 96-97).
For claims 12, 26, Dhakal teaches that the first control signal indicates that the set of delay values are applied for a data signal associated with the demodulation reference signal (Paras 23-24).
For claims 13, 27, Ali teaches that a first quantity of the set of antenna ports (col. 19, lines 55-67), a second quantity of antenna ports associated with the multi-port reference signal (col. 19, lines 55-67), and a third quantity of demodulation reference signals in the set of demodulation reference signals are the same (col. 11, lines 15-40).
For claim 14, Dhakal teaches that the first control signal indicates a mapping between the set of delay values and the set of antenna ports (Paras 60, 79).
Claim(s) 3, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dhakal and Ali as applied to claims 1, 16 above, and further in view of Su et al. (2024/0,188,055).
For claims 3, 18, Dhakal and Ali do not expressly disclose that the multi-port reference signal is a virtual reference signal corresponding to the first reference signal. Su teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant environment (background, summary and claims) that includes this limitation (Para 236). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Su in order to provide improvements to the handling of reference signals (Paras 3-5).
Claim(s) 4, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dhakal and Ali as applied to claims 1, 16 above, and further in view of Koivisto et al. (8,825,069).
For claims 4, 19, Dhakal and Ali do not expressly disclose a doppler profile of the demodulation reference signal corresponds to the first reference signal. Koivisto teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) that includes this limitation (col. 9, line 45 - col. 10, line 20). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Koivisto in order to provide improvements to the handling of antenna ports (col. 2, line 50 - col. 3, line 60).
Claim(s) 9, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dhakal and Ali as applied to claims 1, 16 above, and further in view of Choi et al. (2025/0,007,600).
For claims 9, 23, Dhakal and Ali do not expressly disclose to transmit an uplink data message applying the set of delay values. Choi teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) that includes this limitation (Para 107). At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Choi in order to provide improvements to CSI (Para 3).
For claims 15, 28, Choi teaches that a maximum delay for the set of delay values corresponds to a difference between cyclic prefix length (Para 38) and a maximum quantity of sample delays (Paras 47, 58-62).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MELVIN H POLLACK whose telephone number is (571)272-3887. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571)270-1684. 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.
/MELVIN H POLLACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Prosecution Insights