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
This is in response to an amendment/response filed on January 22,2026.
No Claims have been amended.
No Claims have been cancelled.
No Claims have been added.
Claims 1-30 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on January 22,2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues on pages 8-9 of the applicant’s arguments/remarks that either Zewail or Suzuki fails to disclose “signaling includes a field for conveying an indicator of a co-scheduled UE for the set of DMRS ports”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Suzuki discloses we provide a framework for signaling at least some information about co-schedule DMRS ports within the same and/or different CDM group in Mu-MIMO by adding new fields to the DMRS layer-to-port mapping table .(See Figs. 3-6, [0022]-[0023],[0066],[0069],[0085],[0101]).
Based on the above disclosures and others Suzuki at least teaches signaling includes a field for conveying an indicator of a co-scheduled UE for the set of DMRS ports as claimed by the instant application.
For at least the reasons provided above, the applicant arguments regarding independent claims are not persuasive. The applicant argues that independent claims are patentable for similar reasons and are also not persuasive. The applicant further argues that since dependent claims depend on the argued independent claim; they are patentable at least by virtue of their dependencies. Since the applicant's arguments regarding independent claims are not persuasive, the applicant's arguments regarding dependent claims are also not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zewail et al. (US Application 2021/0320772, hereinafter Zewail) .
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claims 1, 15, 28, 30,Zewail discloses a user equipment (UE), a network node, a method for wireless communication(Figs. 2,8,11), comprising:
one or more memories(239,282,292); and one or more processors (240,280,290), coupled to the one or more memories ([0046] –[0047]), configured to:
receive signaling that schedules a shared channel and indicates a set of demodulation reference signal (DMRS) ports scheduled for the UE, the signaling including a field for conveying an indicator of a co-scheduled UE for the set of DMRS ports(Abstract, [0081]- [0085], [0104], which recites the base station 110 may transmit a DMRS configuration to the UE 120. The DMRS configuration may be included in a configuration message, such as a radio resource control (RRC) message. As shown, the DMRS configuration may indicate one or more CDM groups configured for the UE 120, and corresponding DMRS ports included in each CDM group. The base station 110 may transmit, to the UE 120, an indication (e.g., a second indication) of whether a second set of DMRS transmissions for another antenna port, included in the CDM group, is present or absent for another UE 120 (e.g., different from the UE 120 shown in FIG. 8). In example 800, DMRS port 0 and DMRS port 1 are included in CDM group 0, DMRS port 0 is assigned to the UE 120, and the second indication indicates that DMRS transmissions are absent on DMRS port 1 (which is included in the same CDM group as DMRS port 0)); and communicate a set of DMRSs based at least in part on the signaling(Abstract, [0081]- [0085], [0104], which recite the base station 110 may transmit DMRSs according to the first indication and the second indication).
Regarding claims 2, 16, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field conveys information associated with a quantity of co-scheduled UEs for the set of DMRS ports or a resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claim 3, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 2, wherein the field conveys information indicating whether there are any co-scheduled UEs([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claims 4, 17, 29, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes a bit indicator of the co-scheduled UE([0086],[0096],[0101]).
Regarding claims 5, 18, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the bit indicator is a 1-bit indicator([0086],[0096],[0101]).
Regarding claims 6, 19, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the bit indicator is a multi-bit indicator([0086],[0096],[0101]).
Regarding claims 7, 20, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, to communicate the set of DMRSs, are configured to: estimate a channel based at least in part on a content of the field(Abstract, [0006]-[0021]).
Regarding claims 8, 21, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein content of the field indicates an orthogonal cover code of the co-scheduled UE, and wherein communicating the set of DMRSs comprises: estimate a channel based at least in part on the orthogonal cover code of the co-scheduled UE(Abstract, [0006]-[0021]).
Regarding claim 9, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field includes a first bit to indicate the co-scheduled UE being within a resource block allocation of the UE([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claims 10, 23,Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field conveys information associated with a partition of the set of DMRS ports by port number or orthogonal cover code type([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claims 11, 24, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field includes one or more bit indicators mapped to indicate at least one of: the quantity of co-scheduled UEs, a rank, or a port.
Regarding claim 12, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field is configured to indicate whether the resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE overlaps with one or more assigned resource blocks of the UE([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claims 13, 26, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes downlink control information([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claims 14, 27, Zewail discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE)([0085],[0095],[0108],[0117],[0161]).
Regarding claim 22, Zewail discloses the network node of claim 15, wherein the field includes a first bit to indicate the co-scheduled UE being within a resource block allocation of the target UE([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Regarding claim 25, Zewail discloses the network node of claim 15, wherein the field is configured to indicate whether the resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE overlaps with one or more assigned resource blocks of the target UE([0081]- [0085], [0104]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by European Patent Application (EP 3468061, hereinafter Suzuki).
Regarding claims 1, 15, 28, 30,discloses Suzuki discloses a user equipment (UE) , a network node, a method (Figs. 1-6), for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories (inherent features of UE and network device); and one or more processors (210,280) , coupled to the one or more memories, configured to:
receive signaling that schedules a shared channel and indicates a set of demodulation reference signal (DMRS) ports scheduled for the UE (Abstract,[0052]-[0053], [0058],which recites reference signal carried DMRS port ), the signaling including a field for conveying an indicator of a co-scheduled UE for the set of DMRS ports([0061]-[0068], which recites indication of a co-scheduled UE) ; and communicate a set of DMRSs based at least in part on the signaling(Abstract,[0052]-[0053], [0058], [0061]-[0066] which recites the transmission DMRS).
Regarding claims 2, 16, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field conveys information associated with a quantity of co-scheduled UEs for the set of DMRS ports or a resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claim 3, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 2, wherein the field conveys information indicating whether there are any co-scheduled UEs([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claims 4, 17, 29, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes a bit indicator of the co-scheduled UE([0012]).
Regarding claims 5, 18, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the bit indicator is a 1-bit indicator([0012]).
Regarding claims 6, 19, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the bit indicator is a multi-bit indicator([0012]).
Regarding claims 7, 20, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors, to communicate the set of DMRSs, are configured to: estimate a channel based at least in part on a content of the field([0010]).
Regarding claims 8, 21, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein content of the field indicates an orthogonal cover code of the co-scheduled UE, and wherein communicating the set of DMRSs comprises: estimate a channel based at least in part on the orthogonal cover code of the co-scheduled UE([0010]).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field includes a first bit to indicate the co-scheduled UE being within a resource block allocation of the UE([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claims 10, 23, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field conveys information associated with a partition of the set of DMRS ports by port number or orthogonal cover code type([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claims 11, 24, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field includes one or more bit indicators mapped to indicate at least one of: the quantity of co-scheduled UEs, a rank, or a port([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claim 12, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the field is configured to indicate whether the resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE overlaps with one or more assigned resource blocks of the UE([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claims 13, 26,Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes downlink control information([0010]).
Regarding claims 14,27, Suzuki discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the signaling includes a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE)([0008]).
Regarding claim 22, Suzuki discloses the network node of claim 15, wherein the field includes a first bit to indicate the co-scheduled UE being within a resource block allocation of the target UE([0061]-[0068]).
Regarding claim 25, Suzuki discloses the network node of claim 15, wherein the field is configured to indicate whether the resource block allocation for the co-scheduled UE overlaps with one or more assigned resource blocks of the target UE([0061]-[0068]).
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 DADY CHERY whose telephone number is (571)270-1207. The examiner can normally be reached M to T, 8 am to 5pm.
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, Moo Jeong can be reached at 571-272-9617. 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.
/DADY CHERY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461