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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 May 2026 has been entered.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 and 21-22 are allowed.
Claim 21 is 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.
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 27 May 2026), Claims 1-8, 10-19, and 21-22 are pending.
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 27 May 2026), Claims 1, 11, and 17 are amended and said amendments are narrowing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 1-3 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Matsumura et al. (US 20250119256 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura”).
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, 5, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 20250119256 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura”) in view of Rahman et al. (US 20230148388 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Rahman”).
Regarding Claim 1, Matsumura discloses or more non-transitory computer-readable media having instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause a user equipment (UE) (¶538 & ¶543 & Fig. 57, Matsumura discloses a memory 1003 storing program codes that, when executed by a processor 1001, causing a user terminal, or a user equipment (UE), to perform a method) to:
determining that a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission (Claim 8 & ¶499, Matsumura discloses determining that a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) transmission in response to receiving a downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)) of more than four layers to be transmitted (Claim 8 & ¶499 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses determining that the PUSCH transmission has more than 8 DMRS ports or 12 DMRS ports based upon a first enhanced DMRS configuration or a second enhanced DMRS configuration respectively. One having ordinary skill in the art would have known, at the time the claimed invention was effectively filed, that the number of antenna ports corresponds to the number of layers. Here, the number of antenna ports is at least 8 or 12, thus the number of layers for the PUSCH is greater than 4);
determining a set of antenna ports (Claim 8 & ¶500, Matsumura discloses determining a set of antenna ports based upon an antenna port indication of downlink control information (DCI) and a configuration of a DMRS) to be utilized for transmission of the PUSCH transmission (Claim 8 & ¶500 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses that the antenna port indication of the DCI indicates the antenna ports to be used for transmission of the PUSCH and the DCI schedules the PUSCH to be transmitted) based at least in part on whether an enhanced demodulation reference signal (DMRS) is to be utilized (Claim 8 & ¶499 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses determining that the PUSCH transmission has more than 8 DMRS ports or 12 DMRS ports based upon a first enhanced DMRS configuration or a second enhanced DMRS configuration respectively), the set of antenna ports including more than four antenna ports (Claim 8 & ¶499 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses determining that the number of antenna ports , such as 8 DMRS ports or 12 DMRS ports, is greater than four antenna ports. One having ordinary skill in the art would have known, at the time the claimed invention was effectively filed, that the number of antenna ports corresponds is at least 8 or 12).
However, Matsumura does not disclose transmitting the PUSCH transmission utilizing the set of antenna ports.
Rahman, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches transmitting the PUSCH transmission utilizing the set of antenna ports (¶234 & Fig. 11 (1106) & ¶110, Rahman discloses transmitting a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) using a set of eight antenna ports indicated in a previously received downlink control information (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 Matsumura by transmitting the PUSCH transmission utilizing the set of antenna ports as taught by Rahman because wireless data communication with the UE in the uplink is more efficient and effective by allowing the gNB to select appropriate communication parameters (Rahman, ¶3).
Regarding Claim 2, Matsumura in view of Rahman discloses the method of claim 1.
Matsumura further discloses wherein the set of antenna ports are determined based at least in part on a number of front-load symbols associated with the UE (¶270 & Fig. 34, Matsumura discloses a relationship between the set of antenna ports and the number of front-loaded symbols).
Regarding Claim 3, Matsumura in view of Rahman discloses the method of claim 1.
Matsumura further discloses wherein the set of antenna ports are determined based at least in part on a number of demodulation reference signal (DMRS) code division multiplexing (CDM) groups without data associated with the UE (¶270 & Fig. 34, Matsumura discloses a relationship between the set of antenna ports and the number of DMRS CDM groups without data).
Regarding Claim 5, Matsumura in view of Rahman discloses the method of claim 1.
Matsumura further discloses [the method] further comprising:
receiving a second transmission from a base station that indicates at least one antenna port available for transmission of the PUSCH transmission (Claim 8 & ¶500, Matsumura discloses receiving the DCI where the DCI indicates a set of antenna ports based available for a scheduled PUSCH), wherein determining the set of antenna ports includes determining the set of antenna ports based at least in part on the one or more antenna ports indicated in the transmission (Claim 8 & ¶500, Matsumura discloses determining a set of antenna ports based upon an antenna port indication of the DCI).
Regarding Claim 10, Matsumura in view of Rahman discloses the method of claim 5.
Matsumura further discloses the second transmission from the base station comprises a downlink control information (DCI) transmission (Claim 8 & ¶500, Matsumura discloses receiving the DCI where the DCI indicates a set of antenna ports based available for a scheduled PUSCH).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura in view of Wei et al. (US 20170164226 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Wei”).
Regarding Claim 4, Matsumura discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Matsumura does not disclose the method is performed by a first user equipment (UE), wherein the set of antenna ports is a first set of antenna ports, wherein a second UE is configured to utilize a second set of antenna ports for transmission, and wherein the first set of antenna ports and the second set of antenna ports include different antenna ports.
Wei, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the method is performed by a first user equipment (UE) (¶61, Wei discloses a first user equipment (UE)), wherein the set of antenna ports is a first set of antenna ports (¶61, Wei discloses a first set of antenna ports configured for use by the first UE), wherein a second UE is configured to utilize a second set of antenna ports for transmission (¶61, Wei discloses a second UE is configured to use a second set of antenna ports for transmission of periodic channel state information (CSI) reporting), and wherein the first set of antenna ports and the second set of antenna ports include different antenna ports (¶61, Wei discloses that antenna ports 0-15 corresponding to the first set of antenna ports and antenna ports 16-31 corresponding to the second set of antenna ports are different antenna ports).
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 Matsumura by requiring that the method is performed by a first user equipment (UE) and that the set of antenna ports is a first set of antenna ports, requiring that a second UE is configured to utilize a second set of antenna ports for transmission, and requiring that the first set of antenna ports and the second set of antenna ports include different antenna ports as taught by Wei because configuring multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) channel state information (CSI) feedback for periodic and aperiodic reporting with different parameters reduces feedback overhead for CSI reporting (Wei, ¶6-8 & ¶26).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura in view of Lui et al. (US 20250203629 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Lui”).
Regarding Claim 6, Matsumura discloses the method of claim 5.
However, Matsumura does not disclose the second transmission indicates a number of antenna ports available equal to a number of layers for the PUSCH transmission.
Lui, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the second transmission indicates a number of antenna ports available equal to a number of layers for the PUSCH transmission (¶67, Liu discloses that the downlink control information (DCI) message indicates a number of antenna ports available where each antenna port of the number of antenna ports corresponds to a layer of the PUSCH).
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 Matsumura by requiring that the second transmission indicates a number of antenna ports available equal to a number of layers for the PUSCH transmission as taught by Liu because uplink transmission is improved by enabling dynamic switching between single-TRP and multi-TRP based PUSCH schemes (Liu, ¶1 & ¶4-7).
Regarding Claim 7, Matsumura discloses the method of claim 5.
However, Matsumura does not disclose the PUSCH transmission is transmitted with a number of layers, and wherein the second transmission from the base station indicates a number of antenna ports equal to the number of layers.
Lui, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the PUSCH transmission is transmitted with a number of layers (¶67, Liu discloses that the PUSCH is transmitted with a number of layers), and wherein the second transmission from the base station indicates a number of antenna ports equal to the number of layers (¶67, Liu discloses that the downlink control information (DCI) message indicates a number of antenna ports available where each antenna port of the number of antenna ports corresponds to a layer of the PUSCH).
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 Matsumura by requiring that the PUSCH transmission is transmitted with a number of layers where the second transmission from the base station indicates a number of antenna ports equal to the number of layers as taught by Liu because uplink transmission is improved by enabling dynamic switching between single-TRP and multi-TRP based PUSCH schemes (Liu, ¶1 & ¶4-7).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura in view of Chai et al. (US 20210378031 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Chai”).
Regarding Claim 8, Matsumura discloses the method of claim 5.
However, Matsumura does not disclose the at least one antenna port are based at least in part on a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with a user equipment (UE).
Chai, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the at least one antenna port are based at least in part on a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with a user equipment (UE) (¶282, Chai discloses determining a DMRS port based on DMRS configuration type, additional DMRS position, and a quantity of time domain symbols occupied by the DMRS).
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 Matsumura by requiring that the at least one antenna port are based at least in part on a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with the UE as taught by Chai because reduce signaling overheads and improve resource utilization (Chai, ¶8).
Claims 11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 20250119256 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura”) in view of Lee in further view of Rahman.
Regarding Claim 11, Matsumura discloses an apparatus, comprising:
processing circuitry, (¶538 & Fig. 57, Matsumura discloses a user terminal, or user equipment (UE), comprising a processor 1001) to:
a PUSCH transmission corresponding to the PUSCH transmission request having a number of layers more than four (Claim 8 & ¶499 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses determining that the PUSCH transmission has more than 8 DMRS ports or 12 DMRS ports based upon a first enhanced DMRS configuration or a second enhanced DMRS configuration respectively. One having ordinary skill in the art would have known, at the time the claimed invention was effectively filed, that the number of antenna ports corresponds to the number of layers. Here, the number of antenna ports is at least 8 or 12, thus the number of layers for the PUSCH is greater than 4);
receive a transmission from the base station that indicates a plurality of antenna ports available for the PUSCH transmission (Claim 8 & ¶500, Matsumura discloses receiving a downlink control information (DCI) comprising an antenna port indication to determine a set of antenna ports based upon an antenna port indication of downlink control information (DCI) and a configuration of a DMRS), the plurality of antenna ports including a number of antenna ports equal to or greater than the number of layers (Claim 8 & ¶499 & ¶524-525, Matsumura discloses determining that the number of antenna ports , such as 8 DMRS ports or 12 DMRS ports, is greater than four antenna ports. One having ordinary skill in the art would have known, at the time the claimed invention was effectively filed, that the number of antenna ports corresponds is at least 8 or 12); and
However, Matsumura does not disclose the interface circuitry to transmit a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission request to a base station.
Lee, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches transmit a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission request to a base station (¶250-252 & Fig. 18a, Lee discloses transmitting, by the UE, a scheduling request (SR) to request transmitting of a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) transmission to the BS).
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 Matsumura by transmitting a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission request to a base station as taught by Lee because wireless communication systems are improved by minimizing latency by enabling a contention-based radio resource region for uplink transmission (Lee, ¶4-5). However, Matsumura in view of Lee does not disclose transmit the PUSCH transmission to the base station via the plurality of antenna ports.
Rahman, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches to transmit the PUSCH transmission to the base station via the plurality of antenna ports (¶234 & Fig. 11 (1106) & ¶110, Rahman discloses transmitting a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) using a set of eight antenna ports indicated in a previously received downlink control information (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 Matsumura by transmitting the PUSCH transmission to the base station via the plurality of antenna ports as taught by Rahman because wireless data communication with the UE in the uplink is more efficient and effective by allowing the gNB to select appropriate communication parameters (Rahman, ¶3).
Regarding Claim 13, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman discloses the apparatus of claim 12.
Matsumura further discloses wherein the set of antenna ports are determined based at least in part on a number of front-load symbols associated with the UE (¶270 & Fig. 34, Matsumura discloses a relationship between the set of antenna ports and the number of front-loaded symbols).
Regarding Claim 14, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman discloses the apparatus of claim 12.
Matsumura further discloses wherein the set of antenna ports are determined based at least in part on a number of demodulation reference signal (DMRS) code division multiplexing (CDM) groups without data associated with the UE (¶270 & Fig. 34, Matsumura discloses a relationship between the set of antenna ports and the number of DMRS CDM groups without data).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura in view of Lee in view of Rahman in further view of Chai et al. (US 20210378031 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Chai”).
Regarding Claim 12, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman discloses the apparatus of claim 11.
However, Matsumura n in view of Lee does not disclose the plurality of antenna ports is selected based at least in part on a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with the UE.
Chai, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the plurality of antenna ports is selected based at least in part on a DMRS configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with a user equipment (UE) (¶282, Chai discloses determining a DMRS port based on DMRS configuration type, additional DMRS position, and a quantity of time domain symbols occupied by the DMRS).
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 Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman by requiring that the plurality of antenna ports is selected based at least in part on a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) configuration type and a number of symbols per DMRS location associated with a user equipment (UE) as taught by Chai because reduce signaling overheads and improve resource utilization (Chai, ¶8).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura in view of Lee in view of Rahman in further view of Gao et al. (US 20240357584 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Gao”).
Regarding Claim 15, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman discloses the apparatus of claim 11.
However, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman does not disclose the second transmission includes a first field that indicates an availability of a first group of antenna ports and a second field that indicates an availability of a second group of the antenna ports, wherein the plurality of antenna ports available is indicated based at least in part on the first field and the second field.
Gao, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the transmission includes a first field that indicates an availability of a first group of antenna ports (¶88-92 & Fig. 3, Gao discloses that a downlink control information (DCI) message includes a first field where the first field indicates a first number of ports for the DMRS. Gao further discloses that the DCI includes a fourth field, an antenna ports field, that indicates the total number of antenna ports) and a second field that indicates an availability of a second group of the antenna ports (¶88-92 & Fig. 3, Gao discloses that the DCI message also includes a second field where the second field indicates a second number of ports for the DMRS), wherein the plurality of antenna ports available is indicated based at least in part on the first field and the second field (¶88-92 & Fig. 3, Gao discloses a first number of ports for the DMRS and a second number of ports for the DMRS based on the first field and the second field).
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 Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman by requiring that the second transmission includes a first field that indicates an availability of a first group of antenna ports and a second field that indicates an availability of a second group of the antenna ports, wherein the plurality of antenna ports available is indicated based at least in part on the first field and the second field as taught by Gao because PUSCH transmission is improved by enabling the device to determine the total number of layers for the PUSCH based on the first number and a second number in the DCI (Gao, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 16, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman discloses the apparatus of claim 11.
However, Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman the one or more processors are further to: receive a radio resource control (RRC) configuration message from the base station including a table that indicates the plurality of antenna ports, wherein the second transmission from the base station indicates the table.
Gao, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the one or more processors are further to:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) configuration message from the base station including a table that indicates the plurality of antenna ports (¶80 & ¶113-114, Gao discloses that radio resource control (RRC) signaling from the BS may indicate an antenna ports indication table), wherein the second transmission from the base station indicates the table (¶80 & ¶113-114, Gao discloses that radio resource control (RRC) signaling from the BS may indicate a field of bits which further indicates an antenna ports indication table).
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 Matsumura in view of Lee in further view of Rahman by requiring that the one or more processors are further to: receive a radio resource control (RRC) configuration message from the base station including a table that indicates the plurality of antenna ports, wherein the second transmission from the base station indicates the table as taught by Gao because PUSCH transmission is improved by enabling the device to determine the total number of layers for the PUSCH based on the first number and a second number in the DCI (Gao, Abstract).
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
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
Prosecution Insights