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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application, PCT/CN2022/090481 filed 4-29-22, under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
These information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9-6-24, 10-22-25 & 12-11-25. These submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, these information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed 9-6-24 are objected to because all the details in the gray circles of Figures 1-4 are not visible. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-20,
each abbreviation in claims 1-20 should be spelled out at least in the first mention in each claim set/branch, e.g. (in set) Phase Tracking Reference Signal (PT-RS){claim 1, line 5} and (in branch) Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS){claim 2, line 3; claim 5, line 6; claim 6, line 6; claim 7, line 6}, etc.
Claim 3, line 2,
---then--- should be inserted before the word “PUSCH”
Claim 3, line 4,
The second occurrence of the word “port” should be changed to ---ports---
Claim 4, line 4,
---then--- should be inserted before the word “PUSCH”
Claim 5, line 3,
“players” should be changed to ---layers---
Claim 5, line 5,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 6, line 5,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 7, line 1,
“3” should be changed to ---5---
Claim 7, line 3,
“players” should be changed to ---layers---
Claim 7, line 4,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 13, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 14, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 15, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 15, line 2,
---then--- should be inserted before the second occurrence of the word “PUSCH”
Claim 16, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 16, line 4,
---then--- should be inserted before the word “PUSCH”
Claim 17, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 17, line 3,
“players” should be changed to ---layers---
Claim 17, line 5,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 18, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Claim 18, line 5,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 19, line 1,
a/. “processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
b/. “15” should be changed to ---17---
Claim 19, line 3,
“players” should be changed to ---layers---
Claim 19, line 4,
---then--- should be inserted after the word “panel”
Claim 20, line 1,
“processor” should be changed to ---a User Equipment (UE)---
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The independent claim 13 contains subject matter {e.g. “a processor…comprising at least one controller coupled with at least one memory”(claim 13, lines 1-2)} which was not described in the specification {Specification of this instant application (US 20250300781 A1): ¶0157-¶0164 & Fig.7 wherein UE comprises a processor coupled to a memory} in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Dependent Claims 14-20 are rejected in virtue of their dependencies on the independent claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 11-13 & 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
-Claims 1, 11-12 & 13 are vague and indefinite because claims 1, 11-12 & 13 are not clear what the UE use the determined mapping for?
-Claims 3-7 & 15-19 are vague and indefinite because they are not clear whether the if clause as recited all the limitations in each claim or just a portion of each claim. It is assumed that the if clause in each claim recited all the limit, please clarify what would happen if all the recited limitations in the if clause happened; Also, it is assumed that the if clause in each claim recited just a portion of each claim, please clarify which portion is in the if clause and what happen if the portion of the if clause happened? It is suggested that claims 3-7 & 15-19 are corrected as objected to over 112 rejection.
-Claim 7 recites the limitation "a second predefined table" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Likewise, claim 19 has the same issue as set forth in claim 7. Note that “first predefined table” was found in claims 5 and 17, respectively.
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.
(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) 1-2 & 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1-2) as being anticipated by Chen (US 2024/0275556 A1).
Regarding Claim 1.
A user equipment (UE){Chen (US 2024/0275556 A1): UE 350-Fig.3 & ¶0052-¶0057; Fig.9, Fig.10 & ¶0096; 406-Fig.4 & ¶0097 and 408-Fig.4 & ¶0098}, comprising:
at least one memory {Chen: memory 360-Fig.3}; and
at least one processor {Chen: RX processor 356-Fig.3, Controller/Processor 359-Fig.3 & TX processor 368-Fig.3} coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to:
receive a configuration to transmit 2 or 4 PT-RS ports when 4 antenna ports codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured {Chen: ¶0066, ¶0072, ¶0077, ¶0079 & ¶0085 and 902-Fig.9, ¶0093 wherein “At 902, the UE may receive, from a base station, a configuration for an uplink PTRS. For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may receive, at 406, an uplink PTRS configuration from the base station 404” & ¶0094 wherein “At 904, the UE may receive, from the base station, DCI that schedules a PUSCH based on SDM—the PUSCH is associated with a plurality of transmission parameters. For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may receive, at 408, a scheduling DCI from the base station 404 for an SDM PUSCH”; also see 1002-Fig.10 & ¶0097 wherein “At 1002, the UE may receive, from a base station, a configuration for an uplink PTRS. For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may receive, at 406, an uplink PTRS configuration from the base station 404.” 1004-Fig.10 & ¶0098 wherein “At 1004, the UE may receive, from the base station, DCI that schedules a PUSCH based on SDM—the PUSCH is associated with a plurality of transmission parameters. For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may receive, at 408, a scheduling DCI from the base station 404 for an SDM PUSCH. The SDM PUSCH may be associated with different parameters for beams, power control, TPMIs, etc.”}; and
determine a mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and the PT-RS ports {Chen: ¶0077, ¶0079 & ¶0085 and 906-Fig.9 & ¶0095 wherein “At 906, the UE may transmit, to the base station, the PUSCH associated with the plurality of transmission parameters based on an association between the uplink PTRS and DMRS ports (the UE inherently determines the claimed mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and PTRS ports by performing the associating step, emphasis added). For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may transmit, at 416, the SDM PUSCH to the base station 404 based on the PTRS-DMRS association performed, at 412.”}.
Regarding Claim 2. The UE of claim 1, wherein, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
determine, for each of the transmitted PT-RS ports, a DMRS port associated with the transmitted PT-RS port {Chen: ¶0085 and 906-Fig.9 & ¶0095 wherein “At 906, the UE may transmit, to the base station, the PUSCH associated with the plurality of transmission parameters based on an association between the uplink PTRS and DMRS ports (the UE inherently determines the claimed mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and PTRS ports by performing the associating step, emphasis added). For example, referring to FIG. 4, the UE 402 may transmit, at 416, the SDM PUSCH to the base station 404 based on the PTRS-DMRS association performed, at 412.”}.
Regarding Claim 10. The UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to:
transmit a capability of full-coherent or a capability of partial-coherent or non-coherent {Chen: ¶0072 & ¶0077}.
Regarding Claim 11.
-Claim 11 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
A method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
receiving a configuration to transmit 2 or 4 PT-RS ports when 4 antenna ports codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured; and
determining a mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and the PT-RS ports.
Regarding Claim 12.
-Claim 12 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claims 1, 11, vice versa and further as following:
A base station {Chen (US 20240275556 A1): base station 310-Fig.3, Fig.11 & Fig.13 }, comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the base station to:
transmit a configuration to transmit 2 or 4 PT-RS ports when 4 antenna ports codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured; and
determine a mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and the PT-RS ports.
Regarding Claim 13.
-Claim 13 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1 & 11.
A processor for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to:
receive a configuration to transmit 2 or 4 PT-RS ports when 4 antenna ports codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured; and
determine a mapping between PUSCH antenna ports and the PT-RS ports.
Regarding Claim 14. The processor of claim 13, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to:
determine, for each of the transmitted PT-RS ports, a DMRS port associated with the transmitted PT-RS port.
-Claim 14 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, 11, 13 & 2.
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) 8 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2024/0275556 A1) in view of Matsumura (US 2025/0287397 A1).
Regarding Claim 8. With the same reasons as set forth in the UE of claim 1, Chen does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: determine a frequency density and the RE mapping for the PT-RS port(s) for a panel according to PRBs allocated for PUSCH transmission part associated with the panel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Matsumura (US 2025/0287397 A1) disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: determine a frequency density and the RE mapping for the PT-RS port(s) for a panel according to PRBs allocated for PUSCH transmission part associated with the panel {Matsumura: ¶0148-¶0150, ¶0238-¶0243, ¶0248-¶0249 & Figs.15-16}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Matsumura’s teaching to Chen’s system with the motivation being “to appropriately perform simultaneous UL transmission using a plurality of beams/panels”{Matusumura: ¶0009}.
Regarding Claim 20. The processor of claim 13, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to:
determine a frequency density and the RE mapping for the PT-RS port(s) for a panel according to PRBs allocated for PUSCH transmission part associated with the panel.
-Claim 20 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, 11, 13 & 8.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2024/0275556 A1) in view of ZTE (R1-1801587, March 2, 2018).
Regarding Claim 9. With the same reasons as set forth in the UE of claim 1, Chen does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: determine the PUSCH to PT-RS power ratios factor per layer per RE for a panel according to a number of PUSCH layers transmitted by the panel and a coherent capability of the panel.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ZTE (R1-1801587, March 2, 2018) disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: determine the PUSCH to PT-RS power ratios factor per layer per RE for a panel according to a number of PUSCH layers transmitted by the panel and a coherent capability of the panel {ZTE: section 2.5 UL PT-RS power boosting}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply ZTE’s teaching to Chen’s system with the motivation being to “fix the power for the coherent transmission” where “partial-coherent transmission can be configured for a UE with full-coherent capability”{ZTE: ¶1 in section 2.5}.
Claim(s) 3, 5, 7, 15, 17 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 2024/0275556 A1) in view of Zhang (US 2023/0035992 A1).
Regarding Claim 3. {Currently Corrected} With the same reasons as set forth in the UE of claim 1, wherein; if the configuration is to transmit PT-RS port 0 and PT-RS port 1, PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 1 {Chen: ¶0077 and Fig.6 wherein multiple PUSCH antenna ports shared a PT-RS port, e.g. 1000 & 1002 shared PTRS port 0 and 1001 & 1003 shared PTRS port 1}.
Chen does not explicitly disclose the underlined limitation of “PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 1”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang (US 2023/0035992 A1) disclose the underlined limitation of “PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 1”{Zhang: Fig.3 & ¶0050-¶0051 wherein individual PUSCH ports may be mapped to one of a plurality antenna panels including panel 1 and panel 2; ¶0042 wherein PUSCH ports 1000 & 1002 may share one antenna panel, while PUSCH port 1001 & 1003 may share the other panel}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Zhang’s teaching to Chen’s system with the motivation being “to support more than one codeword for uplink transmissions in NR networks”{Zhang: ¶0044}.
Regarding Claim 5. {Currently Corrected}
With the same reasons as set forth in the UE of claim 3, Chen does not explicitly disclose the underlined limitation of “wherein; if one PUSCH layer of the PUSCH transmission is transmitted by one panel of the first panel and the second panel and two or three PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the other panel of the first panel and the second panel, the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the other panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the other panel according to a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a first predefined table” {Chen: table 600 in Fig.6 & ¶0073-¶0077, e.g. ¶0074 wherein “If one uplink PTRS port is configured (e.g., PTRS port 0), a value of a bit associated with the PTRS-DRMS association field may indicate the DMRS port that is associated with the PTRS port. For example, as illustrated in the table 600, a value of 0 may be indicative of a first scheduled DMRS port, a value of 1 may be indicative of a second scheduled DMRS port, a value of 2 may be indicative of a third scheduled DMRS port, and a value of 3 may be indicative of a fourth scheduled DMRS port.” And ¶0077 wherein multiple PUSCH antenna ports shared a PT-RS port, e.g. 1000 & 1002 shared PTRS port 0 and 1001 & 1003 shared PTRS port 1; and wherein “the DMRS ports may correspond to the layers that are transmitted with the PUSCH antenna ports”}.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang (US 2023/0035992 A1) disclose the underlined limitation of “wherein; if one PUSCH layer of the PUSCH transmission is transmitted by one panel of the first panel and the second panel and two or three PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the other panel of the first panel and the second panel, the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the other panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the other panel according to a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a first predefined table” {Zhang: Fig.3 & ¶0050-¶0051 wherein individual PUSCH ports may be mapped to one of a plurality antenna panels including panel 1 and panel 2; ¶0042 wherein PUSCH ports 1000 & 1002 may share one antenna panel, while PUSCH port 1001 & 1003 may share the other panel}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Zhang’s teaching to Chen’s system with the motivation being “to support more than one codeword for uplink transmissions in NR networks”{Zhang: ¶0044}.
Regarding Claim 7. {Currently Corrected}
With the same reasons as set forth in the UE of claim [3] 5, Chen does not explicitly disclose the underlined limitation of “wherein; if two PUSCH layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the first panel and the other two PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the second panel, the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the first panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the first panel according to MSB of a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a second predefined table {112, claim 5 recites “a first predefine table”}, and PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the second panel is associated with the one DMRS port associated with the second panel according to LSB of the field value of the PT-RS-DMRS association field based on the second predefined table” {Chen: table 650 in Fig.6 & ¶0073-¶0077, e.g. ¶0075 wherein “In order to determine which DMRS ports share which PTRS ports, the first bit may correspond to a value of an MSB and the second bit may correspond to a value of an LSB, as illustrated in the table 650. If the first bit/MSB has a value of 0, the first DMRS port may share PTRS port 0. If the first bit/MSB has a value of 1, the second DMRS port may share PTRS port 0. Similarly, if the second bit has a value of 0, the first DMRS port may share PTRS port 1. If the second bit has a value of 1, the second DMRS port may share PTRS port 1. Accordingly, the first bit/MSB may be used to identify which DMRS ports share PTRS port 0 based on a value of the first bit/MSB (e.g., value 0=first DMRS port; value 1=second DMRS port), and the second bit/LSB may be used to identify which DMRS ports share PTRS port 1 based on a value of the second bit/LSB (e.g., value 0=first DMRS port; value 1=second DMRS port).” And ¶0077 wherein multiple PUSCH antenna ports shared a PT-RS port, e.g. 1000 & 1002 shared PTRS port 0 and 1001 & 1003 shared PTRS port 1; and wherein “the DMRS ports may correspond to the layers that are transmitted with the PUSCH antenna ports”}.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang (US 2023/0035992 A1) disclose the underlined limitation of “The UE of claim [3] 5, wherein; if two PUSCH layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the first panel and the other two PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the second panel, the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the first panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the first panel according to MSB of a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a second predefined table, and PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the second panel is associated with the one DMRS port associated with the second panel according to LSB of the field value of the PT-RS-DMRS association field based on the second predefined table” {Zhang: Fig.3 & ¶0050-¶0051 wherein individual PUSCH ports may be mapped to one of a plurality antenna panels including panel 1 and panel 2; ¶0042 wherein PUSCH ports 1000 & 1002 may share one antenna panel, while PUSCH port 1001 & 1003 may share the other panel}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply Zhang’s teaching to Chen’s system with the motivation being “to support more than one codeword for uplink transmissions in NR networks”{Zhang: ¶0044}.
Regarding Claim 15. The processor of claim 13, wherein: if the configuration is to transmit PT-RS port 0 and PT-RS port 1, PUSCH antenna ports 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna port 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1003 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 1.
-Claim 15 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, 11, 13 & 3.
Regarding Claim 17. {Currently Corrected}
The processor of claim 15, wherein:
if one PUSCH layer of the PUSCH transmission is transmitted by one panel of the first panel and the second panel and two or three PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the other panel of the first panel and the second panel,
the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the other panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the other panel according to a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a first predefined table.
-Claim 17 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, 11, 13, 15 & 5.
Regarding Claim 19. {Currently Corrected}
The processor of claim [15] 17, wherein: if two PUSCH layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the first panel and the other two PUSCH [p]layers of the PUSCH transmission are transmitted by the second panel,
the PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the first panel is associated with one DMRS port associated with the first panel according to MSB of a field value of a PT-RS-DMRS association field based on a second predefined table {112, claim 17 recites “a first predefine table”}, and PT-RS port shared by the PUSCH antenna ports associated with the second panel is associated with the one DMRS port associated with the second panel according to LSB of the field value of the PT-RS-DMRS association field based on the second predefined table.
-Claim 19 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, 11, 13, 17 & 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 16 & 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a & b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st & 2nd paragraphs, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claims 4 & 6. The prior art fails to teach the UE of claim 1, wherein;
if the configuration is to transmit PT-RS port 0, PT-RS port 1, PT-RS port 2 and PT-RS port 3 when 4 antenna ports partial coherent or non-coherent codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured,
PUSCH antenna ports 1000 and 1002 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna ports 1001 and 1003 associated with the first panel share PT-RS port 1, PUSCH antenna ports 1000 and 1002 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 2, and PUSCH antenna ports 1001 and 1003 associated with the second panel share PT-RS port 2.
Regarding Claims 16 & 18 (4~). {Currently Corrected} The prior art fails to teach the [processor] UE of claim 13, wherein:
if the configuration is to transmit PT-RS port 0, PT-RS port 1, PT-RS port 2 and PT-RS port 3 when 4 antenna ports partial coherent or non-coherent codebook based PUSCH transmission is configured,
PUSCH antenna ports 1000 and 1002 associated with a first panel share PT-RS port 0, PUSCH antenna ports 1001 and 1003 associated with the first panel share PT-RS port 1, PUSCH antenna ports 1000 and 1002 associated with a second panel share PT-RS port 2, and PUSCH antenna ports 1001 and 1003 associated with the second panel share PT-RS port 2.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liu (US 2025/0203628 A1, same assignee) discloses Methods and apparatuses for precoding indication for simultaneous multi-panel UL transmission. In one embodiment, a UE comprises a transceiver; and a processor coupled to the transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to receive, via the transceiver, a DCI containing at least one TPMI field indicating a precoding matrix, the DCI schedules a multi-panel simultaneous PUSCH transmission with up to 4 layers; and determine, for the UE equipped with a first panel and a second panel, a precoding matrix used for the first panel and a precoding matrix used for the second panel according to the at least one TPMI field {Claims 1, 3-7, 9-21}.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONGCHAU BA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 AM -5:30 PM.
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, RICKY NGO can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/PHUONGCHAU BA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights