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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/08/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on August 12, 2026, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Applicant should note that the large number of references in the attached IDSs have been considered by the examiner in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search. See MPEP 609.05(b). Applicant is invited to point out any particular reference(s) in the IDS that they believe may be of particular relevance to the instant claimed invention in response to this Office Action. It is desirable to avoid the submission of long lists of documents if it can be avoided. If a long list is submitted, highlight those documents which have been specifically brought to applicant’s attention and/or are known to be of most significance. See Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc., 359 F. Supp. 948, 175 USPQ 260 (S.D. Fla. 1972), aff ’d, 479 F.2d 1338, 178 USPQ 577 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 874 (1974). But cf. Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 48 F.3d 1172, 33 USPQ2d 1823 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
Response to Amendment
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 06/08/2026.
Claims 1 and 6 have been amended.
Claim 3 has been canceled.
Claims 2 and 4 were previously canceled.
Claim 1, 5, and 6 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 5, and 6 filed on 06/08/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments related solely to newly added limitations addressed in the instant Office Action with newly identified prior art, thus rendering applicant’s arguments moot.
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 and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nory et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20160302180, hereinafter “Nory”) in view of Yi et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230199797, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/072,512, filed Aug. 31, 2020, hereinafter “Yi”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Nory unless otherwise mentioned.
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, Nory teaches A communication device (Fig. 1; a first device 110 (interpreted as “A communication device”) and a second device 120 (interpreted as “another communication device”).) comprising:
a receiver (Fig. 6 and para [0075]: a transceiver 650) configured to receive a preamble in resources that are selected autonomously by another communication device (para [0055]: At 330, a preamble transmission from the second device (interpreted as “another communication device”) can be detected in a first set of Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbols starting with a first OFDM symbol (interpreted as “resources that are selected autonomously by another communication device”) in a subframe received on the Scell.); and
a processor (Fig. 6, a controller 620) configured to acquire, based on the preamble, information indicating a frequency resource of a control signal (para [0044]: … A preamble sent in OFDM symbols x through y (interpreted as “information indicating a frequency resource of a control signal”) can also indicate presence/absence of control channels and/or control channel configuration, such as search space details, number of blind decodes per control channel type, etc., in each subframe of a burst, where there may be multiple control channel configurations depending on how the eNB may desire to perform LBT.). Examiner’s note: Nory discloses that the preamble can indicate control channel configuration, such as search space details (see, para [0044]), In 3GPP LTE/NR specifications, as further evidenced by Nory (paragraphs [0021], [0023]), a search space defines the specific Control channel Elements (CCEs or ECCEs) which are mapped to Resource Element (Res) or Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs) in the frequency domain. Therefore, providing search space details explicitly constitutes providing “information indicating a frequency resource of a control signal” as broadly claimed.
wherein the receiver receives the control signal from the another communication device based on the information indicating the frequency resource (para [0035]:… In the subframe n where the UE detects/decodes the preamble, the UE can attempt to decode control channels, such as PDCCH or EPDCCH, for DCI containing resource assignment(s) for PDSCH transmission starting with the first OFDM symbol immediately following the OFDM symbol where preamble is detected/decoded or a predetermined OFDM symbol following the OFDM symbol where preamble is detected/decoded.), and
wherein, (para [0055]:… The preamble transmission can be within the first OFDM symbol with a first set of Resource Elements (RE's) of the first OFDM symbol configured for a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) and a second set of RE's of the first OFDM symbol mapped for reference signals) (see also para [0027]). Examiner’s note: In 3GPP LTE/NR standards, an OFDM symbol spans a specific allocated frequency bandwidth. Therefore, transmitting both the preamble and the control signal within the same OFDM symbol explicitly means they share and utilize the same frequency domain resources (i.e., the same frequency band). Consequently, indicating this specific multiplexing configuration to the UE corresponds exactly to indicating that the preamble and the control signal use the same frequency domain resources.;
Nory does not explicitly teach “whether the information includes a bitmap that indicates, for each bandwidth part allocated to the communication device, an allocated frequency resource in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs; or …; is switched by the preamble.”
In analogous art, Yi teaches
“whether the information includes a bitmap that indicates, for each bandwidth part allocated to the communication device, an allocated frequency resource in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs; or …; is switched by the preamble; (para [0233] of Yi and para [0214] of 63/072,512: With the resource allocation type 0, a bitmap over one or more resource block groups (RBGs) may schedule the uplink resource(s). With a resource allocation type 1, a starting PRB index and a length of the scheduled uplink resource(s) may be indicated… The base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a dynamic change between the resource allocation type 0 and the resource allocation type 1 (e.g., ‘dynamicswitch’) (interpreted as “is switched by the preamble”)… For example, when the resource allocation type 0 is configured, the bitmap may indicate each of the one or more RBGs covering the bandwidth of the active UL BWP.). Examiner’s note: Yi teaches a wireless communication method in a 5G NR system utilizing bandwidth Parts (BWPs) (see para [0115] and para [0098] of 63/072,512). Yi further explicitly teaches ‘resource allocation type 0’ which uses a bitmap over one or more resource block groups (RBs) to allocate frequency resources within an active BWP (see para [0233] and para [0214] of 63/072,512). Furthermore, Yi teaches a “dynamic switch” (dynamic change) between different resource allocation types (see paragraphs [0233], [0235] of Yi and paragraphs [0214], [0216] of 63/072,512).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Nory and Yi. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the bitmap-based resource allocation for BWPs and the dynamic switching mechanism of Yi into the preamble-based control signaling system of Nory. The motivation to use the transmitted preamble as the explicit trigger to switch between the two different resource allocation formats (bitmap vs. same resource), as taught by Nory’s use of the preamble to indicate control channel configurations, is to minimize control signaling overhead and reduce latency. In wireless communication systems, encoding a dynamic switch state directly into a physical preamble signal rather than requiring additional subsequent signaling is a standard and predictable design choice to optimize spectral efficiency. Therefore, the combination of Nory and Yi renders the claim obvious.
Regarding claim 6, it is a communication method claim corresponding to the device claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nory in view of Yi, and further in view of Hessler et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190222385, hereinafter “Hessler”).
Regarding Claim 5, Nory and Yi teach The communication device according to claim 1, Nory and Li fail to teach wherein the processor determines, based on the control signal, resources for a phase noise correction signal.
In analogous art, Hessler teaches wherein the processor determines, based on the control signal, resources for a phase noise correction signal (para [0011] of Hessler: It is an object of this disclosure to provide approaches allowing improved handling of reference signaling, in particular PT-RS (‘Phase Tracking Reference Signaling’, interpreted as “control signal”). The approaches in some aspects may facilitate low overhead for configuring and/or adaptive correction for phase errors.) (paragraphs [0076-0079] of Hessler: There may be considered a method for signalling a PT-RS configuration in a DCI to a UE, where the UE receives, including at least an MCS or MCS indication, the number of MIMO layers and a resource mapping (interpreted as “based on the control signal”). The method may comprise Determining a carrier frequency associated to said DCI; Derive a PT-RS mapping (interpreted as “resources for a phase noise correction signal”) from said DCI and carrier frequency; Perform radio communication using said derived PT-RS mapping.) (para [0117] of Hessler: In NR for higher carrier frequencies it is agreed that 3GPP should study the effect of phase noise. In terms of phase noise, the main focus is to introduce Phase Noise Compensation reference signals (PT-RS) (interpreted as “control signal”) to compensate for common phase error (CPE) which constitutes the significant part of the phase noise. When evaluating CPE-compensation, the target is to have sufficient quality estimates of the CPE for different deployment scenarios while maintaining a low overhead.)
The combination of Nory and Yi, and the teaching of the Hessler renders the claimed feature obvious. The use of PT-RS mapping from said DCI is an inherent characteristic of the 5G network, e.g. according to 3GPP/NR taught in Hessler (see para [0117] of Hessler). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify the combination of Nory and Li by using the PT-RS mapping standard discussed in Hessler to determines, based on the PT-RS mapping, resources for a phase noise correction signal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WON JUN CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1695. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 08:00 - 17:00.
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, Derrick W Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/WON JUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights