DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment filed 5/5/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 2, 4, and 13 have been amended. The previous rejections under 35 USC 101 and 112 are withdrawn in light of the present amendments.
Claim 14 has been previously cancelled.
Claims 1-13 and 15-21 remain pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US20190327065A1), hereafter Li.
Regarding claims 1, 2, and 13,
Li (Title: Reference Signal Sending and Receiving Methods and Apparatus) discloses a method (Fig. 2) of operating a signaling radio node in a wireless communication network (Fig. 1; Background) and computer storage medium (Fig. 13, memory 1303) storing a computer program comprising instructions (paragraph 271) causing processing circuitry (Fig. 13, processor 1301) to control and perform a method of transmitting reference signaling (Fig. 2, step 202) having a pattern comprising, in a time domain, N blocks, each block comprising a plurality of symbols (Fig. 3, first reference signal over 4 symbols; second reference signal over 2 symbols), wherein for each symbol of a first block of the N blocks (Fig. 3, first reference signal), the reference signaling is transmitted having a first frequency domain distribution (Fig. 3, first reference signal in 30 kHz spaced sub-band), and for each symbol of a second block of the N blocks (Fig. 3, second reference signal), the reference signaling is transmitted having a second, different frequency domain distribution (Fig. 3, second reference signal in 15 kHz spaced subband).
Regarding claims 3 and 4,
Li discloses a method (Fig. 2) of operating a feedback radio node in a wireless communication network (Fig. 1; Background) configured to/for receiving reference signaling (Fig. 2, step 203) having a pattern comprising, in a time domain, N blocks, each block comprising a plurality of symbols (Fig. 3, first reference signal over 4 symbols; second reference signal over 2 symbols), wherein for each symbol of a first block of the N blocks (Fig. 3, first reference signal), the reference signaling is transmitted having a first frequency domain distribution (Fig. 3, first reference signal in 30 kHz spaced sub-band), and for each symbol of a second block of the N blocks (Fig. 3, second reference signal), the reference signaling is transmitted having a second, different frequency domain distribution (Fig. 3, second reference signal in 15 kHz spaced subband).
Regarding claims 5 and 15,
Li discloses the N blocks are pairwise neighbouring in time (Fig. 3; paragraph 206) or between a pair of blocks, there is inserted a guard period (paragraph 159).
Regarding claims 6 and 16,
Li discloses each of the N blocks comprise M symbols (Fig. 3; each of first/second reference signal across plurality of symbols).
Regarding claims 8 and 18,
Li discloses the reference signaling is CSI-RS (paragraph 3).
Regarding claims 9 and 19,
Li discloses the reference signaling for neighbouring blocks is transmitted having different frequency domain distributions (Fig. 3 as described above; first reference signal in 30 kHz spaced sub-band; second reference signal in 15 kHz spaced subband).
Regarding claim 12,
Li discloses one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution, and the frequency distributions are shifted relative to each other (i.e. offsets of each respective reference signal; Fig. 3; paragraph 28, 53, 158, 165, 172, 206-216, 225-226).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Hajri et al. (US20230361842A1), hereafter Hajri.
Regarding claims 7 and 17,
Li does not expressly disclose the reference signaling of different blocks are associated to different transmission beams.
Hajri discloses analogous art including reference signaling of different blocks are associated to different transmission beams (Fig. 2A; paragraph 114; multiplexing CSI-RS symbols corresponding to different beams).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Li by including reference signaling of different blocks are associated to different transmission beams, as shown by Hajri, thereby enabling the UE to estimate the effective channel frequency response for each of multiple CSI-RS ports corresponding to different beams.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Xiao et al. (US20210359819A1), hereafter Xiao.
Regarding claims 10 and 20,
Li does not expressly show one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution and the frequency distributions associated to the blocks correspond to combs.
Xiao discloses analogous art (Title: Sounding Reference Signal Transmission and Reception) including one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution and the frequency distributions associated to the blocks correspond to combs (paragraph 41; OFDM symbols in SRS resource including transmission comb, comb offset and spatial relation between CSI-RS).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Li by providing one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution and the frequency distributions associated to the blocks correspond to combs, as shown by Xiao, thereby enabling semi-static configuration by higher layer parameter used for uplink timing estimation and downlink scheduling.
Claims 11 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Chatterjee et al. (US20210409173A1), hereafter Chatterjee.
Regarding claims 11 and 21,
Li does not expressly disclose one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution, and the frequency distributions are non-overlapping in frequency domain.
Chatterjee discloses analogous art (Title: Collision Handling of Reference Signals) including one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution, and the frequency distributions are non-overlapping in frequency domain (paragraph 196; PRBs used by the CSI-RS are non-overlapping with PRBs of the SS block).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Li by including one or more of the first frequency distribution, the second frequency distribution, and the frequency distributions are non-overlapping in frequency domain, as shown by Chatterjee, thereby supporting indication of the slot for CSI-RS transmission and the associated SS block.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks on pg. 11-12 of the Amendment, Applicant alleges Li discloses first and second reference signals transmitted at the same time but does not show the first and second reference signals as being of different portions of the same set of N blocks in the time domain. Applicant further contends the claims require a pattern of N blocks in a time domain and the reference signaling is split in the frequency domain based on the time domain pattern, thereby providing benefits of limited interference between beams.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited in the rejection, Fig. 3 of Li clearly shows a first and second reference signal occupying first and second subbands of multiple/N time domain blocks (in Fig. 3, the time axis is across the bottom of the graph) with different frequency domain (the left-side of the graph) distributions (30 kHz in the first subband, 15 kHz in the second subband), as expressly required by the claim. Applicant’s further arguments about the signaling being “split” in the frequency domain and alleged benefits of limiting interference between beams are not rooted in the express claim language. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
For these reasons, the rejections based on Li are properly maintained.
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 GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights