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 .
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) 26-28, 30-32, 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 20200266867 A1, hereinafter Park)
Regarding claim 30, Park teaches:
A method of communication performed by a network device, comprising:
transmitting, to a terminal device, a downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), wherein the DCI comprises a first field, a second field and a third field; and (paragraphs 726, 742 – DCI comprises SRI, TPMI, TRI)
receiving, from the terminal device, the PUSCH based on a value of rank; (Paragraph 731 – determines the PUSCH based on the transmission rank (TRI)).
wherein the value of rank is sum of a first value determined based on the first field and a second value determined based on the second field in a case where the third field indicates a third value, or the value of rank is determined based on the first field in a case where the third filed indicates a fourth value. (Paragraph 755 – the rank is the sum of multiple SRS ports over multiple SRS resources). The examiner interprets that only one of the above limitations needs to be mapped due to the presence of “or”.
Regarding claim 31, Park teaches:
The method of claim 30, wherein the first field is an SRS resource indicator field and the second field is a second SRS resource indicator field in a case where the PUSCH is non-codebook based, the first field is a precoding information and number of layers field and the second field is a second precoding information field in a case where the PUSCH is codebook based. (Paragraph 752-755 – The first and second field are SRS resources in a non-codebook based example. Paragraphs 740-747 – The first field is an SRI which may contain precoding information and determines the TRI (transmission rank indicator) which is the number of layers, the second field is a TPMNI which contains precoding information in a codebook based example).
Regarding claim 32, Park teaches:
The method of claim 30, wherein the first field is used to indicate precoder applied over a first number of layers and the second field is used to indicate precoder applied over a second number of layers; or the first field is used to indicate resources associated with a first number of layers and the second field is used to indicate resources associated with a second number of layers. (Paragraphs 752-757 – In a codebook based example the first field indicates an SRS resource and a second field indicates an SRS resource.)
Regarding claim 34, Park teaches:
A terminal device comprising a processor configured to cause the terminal device to:
receive, from a network device, a downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), wherein the DCI comprises a first field, a second field and a third field; and (Paragraphs 726, 742 – DCI comprises SRI, TPMI, TRI).
transmit, to the network device, the PUSCH based on a value of rank; (Paragraph 731 – determines the PUSCH based on the transmission rank (TRI)).
wherein the value of rank is sum of a first value determined based on the first field and a second value determined based on the second field in a case where the third field indicates a third value, or the value of rank is determined based on the first field in a case where the third filed indicates a fourth value. (Paragraph 755 – the rank is the sum of multiple SRS ports over multiple SRS resources). The examiner interprets that only one of the above limitations needs to be mapped due to the presence of “or”.
Regarding claim 35, Park teaches:
The terminal device of claim 34, wherein the first field is an SRS resource indicator field and the second field is a second SRS resource indicator field in a case where the PUSCH is non-codebook based, the first field is a precoding information and number of layers field and the second field is a second precoding information field in a case where the PUSCH is codebook based. (Paragraph 752-755 – The first and second field are SRS resources in a non-codebook based example. Paragraphs 740-747 – The first field is an SRI which may contain precoding information and determines the TRI (transmission rank indicator) which is the number of layers, the second field is a TPMNI which contains precoding information in a codebook based example).
Regarding claim 36, Park teaches:
The terminal device of claim 34, wherein the first field is used to indicate precoder applied over a first number of layers and the second field is used to indicate precoder applied over a second number of layers; or the first field is used to indicate resources associated with a first number of layers and the second field is used to indicate resources associated with a second number of layers. (Paragraphs 752-757 – In a codebook based example the first field indicates an SRS resource and a second field indicates an SRS resource.)
Claim 26 is a method of claim 34 and is thus rejected.
Claim 27 is a method of claim 35 and is thus rejected.
Claim 28 is a method of claim 36 and is thus rejected.
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.
Claims 29, 33, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Jiang et al. (US 20200412421 A1, hereinafter Jiang).
Claim 29 is a method of claim 37 and is thus rejected.
Regarding claim 33, Park teaches the transmitting of DCI for scheduling a PUSCH where the DCI comprises three fields. The value of rank can be determined based on the three fields.
However, Park does not appear to explicitly teach a specific case where the rank is 3 if the DMRS ports are {0, 2, 3}.
Jiang discloses: The method of claim 30, wherein the DCI comprises a fourth field, the fourth field indicates DMRS ports to be {0, 2, 3} in a case where the value of rank is 3. (Jiang, Paragraph 0032, table 1 – The candidate port set can be predefined for a specific rank. The index 12 contains a rank of 3 for the DRMS ports {0, 2, 3}).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include that example as being consistent with how the rank is determined by the DMRS ports. The motivation to combine is to have a predefined list of candidate set ports for a number of ranks (Jiang, Paragraph 0032).
Regarding claim 37, Park teaches the transmitting of DCI for scheduling a PUSCH where the DCI comprises three fields. The value of rank can be determined based on the three fields.
However, Park does not appear to explicitly teach a specific case where the rank is 3 if the DMRS ports are {0, 2, 3}.
Jiang discloses: The terminal device of claim 34, wherein the DCI comprises a fourth field, the fourth field indicates DMRS ports to be {0, 2, 3} in a case where the value of rank is 3. (Jiang, Paragraph 0032, table 1 – The candidate port set can be predefined for a specific rank. The index 12 contains a rank of 3 for the DRMS ports {0, 2, 3}).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include that example as being consistent with how the rank is determined by the DMRS ports. The motivation to combine is to have a predefined list of candidate set ports for a number of ranks (Jiang, Paragraph 0032).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ryan Crigler whose telephone number is (571)272-9376. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Nicholas A. Jensen can be reached at (571) 270-5443. 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.
/RYAN ALEXANDER CRIGLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472