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 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.
Claims 16-17, 20-21, 24-25 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kwak; Young Woo et al US 20230396385 A1, hereinafter Kwak.
Regarding claims 16, 20, 24 and 28, Kwak teaches, a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system (See Kwak Fig 1B WTRU), the method comprising:
transmitting, to a base station, capability information, wherein the capability information includes a first capability parameter indicating support of an enhanced demodulation reference signal (DMRS) type (“Enhance DMRS type” is interpreted, under BRI, as additional DMRS, e.g., high-density DMRS. Kwak [221] “a WTRU 102 may report WTRU capability for an additional DM-RS to a gNB 180. For example, a WTRU 102 may transmit one or more RRC messages indicating one or more of additional DM-RS patterns, additional DM-RS density, and/or one or more MCSs for an additional DM-RS.”, [305] “A higher density DM-RS for type-1 and/or type-2 DM-RS may be defined, for example, as a part of one or more DM-RS types (e.g., type-1 and/or type-2). In an (e.g., additional or alternative) example, one or more other DM-RS types (e.g., type-3 and/or type-4) may be defined to configure higher density DM-RS, e.g., to provide enhanced channel estimation in the frequency domain.”); and
receiving, from the base station, via higher layer signaling, a configuration for a DMRS, wherein the configuration includes information enabling the enhanced DMRS type for the DMRS (Kwak [221] “A gNB 180 may (e.g., based on a WTRU capability report) schedule a PDSCH and/or a PUSCH with an additional DM-RS.”, [337] “A WTRU 102 may receive one or more sets of DM-RS configurations (e.g., via RRC messaging).”),
wherein the first capability parameter is defined per feature set (FS) (“Feature set” is interpreted as features such as subcarrier spacing, frequency band etc. Kwak [225] “additional DM-RS configuration … with at least one of the following restrictions: subcarrier spacing, an operating frequency band, usage, a WTRU capability, … “), and
wherein the first capability parameter indicates one of:
support of enhanced DMRS Type 1, or support of both the enhanced DMRS type 1 and enhanced DMRS type 2 (Kwak [305] “A higher density DM-RS for type-1 and/or type-2 DM-RS may be defined … to provide enhanced channel estimation in the frequency domain.”, [338] “a WTRU 102 may receive a configuration of any of type 1 DM-RS, type 2 DM-RS and/or enhanced type DM-RS (e.g., for above 52.6 GHz).”.).
With respect to claim 20, claim recites the identical features of claim 16 for a corresponding inter-working method of a base station. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection.
With respect to claim 24, claim recites the identical features of claim 16 for corresponding user equipment. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection.
With respect to claim 28, claim recites the identical features of claim 16 for a corresponding inter-working base station. Therefore, it is subjected to the same rejection.
Regarding claims 17, 21, 25, and 29, Kwak teaches the methods/UE/base station, as outlined in the rejection of claims 16, 20, 24, and 28.
Kwak further teaches, wherein the capability information includes a second capability parameter indicating support of a DMRS port configuration for a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), wherein the second capability information indicates one of: support of a first scheme, or support of both the first scheme and a second scheme, wherein the first scheme is associated with DMRS type 1 or DMRS type 2 for the PUSCH, and wherein the second scheme is associated with the enhanced DMRS type 1 or the enhanced DMRS type 2 for the PUSCH (Kwak [161], [222] teaching support of DMRS port of PUSCH, in addition to teaching of DMRS types as disclosed in the claim 16 rejection).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 18-19, 22-23, 26-27 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak, in view of IDS Reference, KIM; Kyuseok et al US 20220217729 A1, hereinafter KIM.
Regarding claims 18, 22, 26, and 30, Kwak teaches the methods/UE/base station, as outlined in the rejection of claims 16, 20, 24, and 28.
Kwak does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, KIM teaches, further comprising: receiving, from the base station, a higher layer parameter repetitionScheme set to fdmSchemeA or fdmSchemeB; receiving, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), wherein the DCI includes a transmission configuration indication (TCI) state field indicating two TCI states and an antenna port field indicating DMRS ports within one code division multiplexing (CDM) group; and receiving, from the base station, the PDSCH based on the DCI, wherein, in case that the capability information does not indicate a capability to receive the PDSCH without a scheduling restriction, a number of consecutively scheduled resource blocks (RBs) for the PDSCH is even (KIM [316]-[323] teaches, repetitions of data, TCI state information and DMRS port information in the DCI of PDSCH scheduling).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Kwak to include the features as taught by KIM above in order to provide a method for transmitting and receiving a data channel for improving reliability based on multiple Transmission Reception Points (TRPs) (KIM [0001]).
Regarding claims 19, 23, 27, and 31, Kwak teaches the methods/UE/base station, as outlined in the rejection of claims 16, 20, 24, and 28.
Kwak does not expressly teach, however, in the same field of endeavor, KIM teaches, further comprising: receiving, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH); and receiving, from the base station, the PDSCH based on the DCI, wherein, in case that the capability information does not indicate a capability to receive the PDSCH without a scheduling restriction, a number of consecutively scheduled resource blocks (RBs) for the PDSCH is even and an offset for a start of the consecutively scheduled RBs from a common resource block 0 (CRBO) is an even number (KIM [132]-[135], [147] teaches, RBs assignment for PDSCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Kwak to include the features as taught by KIM above in order to provide a method for transmitting and receiving a data channel for improving reliability based on multiple Transmission Reception Points (TRPs) (KIM [0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matsumura, US 20240073890 A1 - TERMINAL, RADIO COMMUNICATION METHOD, AND BASE STATION (para.[237]-[244] teaches UE capability to support enhanced DMRS ports).
LEE, WO 2022031544 A1 - DMRS FOR NR COMMUNICATIONS ABOVE 52.6 GHZ.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0232. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST; Friday variable.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached on 571-270-3770. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights