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 § 112
2.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.
3.Claims 2-6 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.
Claim 2 recites, the method according to wherein the DMRS port index comprises at least one of a first DMRS port index, a second DMRS port index, a third DMRS port index, a fourth DMRS port index, a fifth DMRS port index, a sixth DMRS port index, a seventh DMRS port index, and an eighth DMRS port index;” It is not clear how these will operate all together. For examining purposes, the last limitations is replace with OR. wherein the DMRS port index comprises at least one of a first DMRS port index, a second DMRS port index, a third DMRS port index, a fourth DMRS port index, a fifth DMRS port index, a sixth DMRS port index, a seventh DMRS port index, OR an eighth DMRS port index;” Appropriate correction is required
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101
4. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
5. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
With regards to claim 1, is directed to a mental process (abstract idea)
claim 1, Step 1: a device/machine claim.
Step 2A, Prong 1: the limitations, “obtaining code division multiplexing (CDM) group index, frequency-domain orthogonal cover codes (OCC) and time-domain OCC according to demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index;” are mental processes.
Step 2A, Prong 2: the additional elements individually or as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Specifically, the additional element, “wherein the length of frequency-domain OCC corresponding to the DMRS port index is 4; and wherein the value of DMRS port index is greater than or equal to 8; and wherein the value of CDM group index is o or 1.” are mere adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (mere data gathering, pre-solution activities) (MPEP 2106.05 (g)).
As a whole, the claimed solution is not directed to an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself or any other technology or technical field, but instead use a computer as a tool and maps sequence of demodulation reference signal to a time-frequency resource of the demodulation reference signal for sending.
Step 2B: under Step 2B, limitation(s) that are insignificant extra-solution activity under step 2A, Prong 2, need to be re-evaluated to determine whether they are well-understood, routine, conventional activities.
Specifically, the mere collection or receipt of data over a network is just receiving/transmitting data over a network, which is mere judicial-recognized well-understood, routine, conventional activity (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
When considered a whole, the claimed invention fails to recite any improvement in any technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)) or recite any meaningful limitations (MPEP 2106.05(e)). The limitations are no more than mere automation of a mental process to obtain CDM group index, frequency domain and time domain cover codes according to DMR port index.
Regarding claims 2-6, respectively, depend on claim 1, and are without significantly more than the judicial exception itself as explained in claim 1. Thus claims 2-6 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 1.
With regards to claim 7, is directed to a mental process (abstract idea)
claim 7, Step 1: a device/machine claim.
Step 2A, Prong 1: the limitations, “obtain code division multiplexing (CDM) group index, frequency-domain orthogonal cover codes (OCC) and time-domain OCC according to demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index;” are mental processes.
Step 2A, Prong 2: the additional elements individually or as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Specifically, the additional element “A communication apparatus, comprising; at least one processor connected to a memory, wherein the at least one processor is configured to read and execute a program stored in the memory, to enable the apparatus to:” is just general-purpose computer components, and thus it is just implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer and namely “apply it” (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Specifically, the additional element, “wherein the length of frequency-domain OCC corresponding to the DMRS port index is 4; and wherein the value of DMRS port index is greater than or equal to 8; and wherein the value of CDM group index is o or 1.” are mere adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (mere data gathering, pre-solution activities) (MPEP 2106.05 (g)).
As a whole, the claimed solution is not directed to an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself or any other technology or technical field, but instead use a computer as a tool and maps sequence of demodulation reference signal to a time-frequency resource of the demodulation reference signal for sending.
Step 2B: the claim does not recite additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea when considered both individually and as a whole. Specifically, the additional element “A communication apparatus, comprising; at least one processor connected to a memory, wherein the at least one processor is configured to read and execute a program stored in the memory, to enable the apparatus to:” is just general-purpose computer component, and thus it is just implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer and namely “apply it” (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Specifically, the limitations “wherein the length of frequency-domain OCC corresponding to the DMRS port index is 4; and wherein the value of DMRS port index is greater than or equal to 8; and wherein the value of CDM group index is 0 or 1” are mere adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (mere data gathering, pre-solution activities) (MPEP 2106.05 (g)).
Step 2B: under Step 2B, limitation(s) that are insignificant extra-solution activity under step 2A, Prong 2, need to be re-evaluated to determine whether they are well-understood, routine, conventional activities.
Specifically, the mere collection or receipt of data over a network is just receiving/transmitting data over a network, which is mere judicial-recognized well-understood, routine, conventional activity (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
When considered as a whole, the claimed invention fails to recite any improvement in any technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)) or recite any meaningful limitations (MPEP 2106.05(e)). The limitations are no more than mere automation of a mental process to obtain CDM group index, frequency domain and time domain cover codes according to DMR port index.
Regarding claims 8-12, respectively, depend on claim 7, and are without significantly more than the judicial exception itself as explained in claim 7. Thus claims 2-6 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 7.
With regards to claim 13, is directed to a mental process (abstract idea)
claim 13, Step 1: a device/machine claim.
Step 2A, Prong 1: the limitations, “obtain code division multiplexing (CDM) group index, frequency-domain orthogonal cover codes (OCC) and time-domain OCC according to demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index;” are mental processes.
Step 2A, Prong 2: the additional elements individually or as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Specifically, the additional element “A computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores computer instructions, and when the instructions are run on a computer, the computer is enabled to:” is just general-purpose computer component, and thus it is just implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer and namely “apply it” (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Specifically, the additional element, “wherein the length of frequency-domain OCC corresponding to the DMRS port index is 4; and wherein the value of DMRS port index is greater than or equal to 8; and wherein the value of CDM group index is o or 1.” are mere adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (mere data gathering, pre-solution activities) (MPEP 2106.05 (g)).
As a whole, the claimed solution is not directed to an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself or any other technology or technical field, but instead use a computer as a tool and maps sequence of demodulation reference signal to a time-frequency resource of the demodulation reference signal for sending.
Step 2B: the claim does not recite additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea when considered both individually and as a whole. Specifically, the additional element “A computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores computer instructions, and when the instructions are run on a computer, the computer is enabled to:” is just general-purpose computer component, and thus it is just implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer and namely “apply it” (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Specifically, the limitations “wherein the length of frequency-domain OCC corresponding to the DMRS port index is 4; and wherein the value of DMRS port index is greater than or equal to 8; and wherein the value of CDM group index is 0 or 1” are mere adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (mere data gathering, pre-solution activities) (MPEP 2106.05 (g)).
under Step 2B, limitation(s) that are insignificant extra-solution activity under step 2A, Prong 2, need to be re-evaluated to determine whether they are well-understood, routine, conventional activities.
Specifically, the mere collection or receipt of data over a network is just receiving/transmitting data over a network, which is mere judicial-recognized well-understood, routine, conventional activity (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
When considered as a whole, the claimed invention fails to recite any improvement in any technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)) or recite any meaningful limitations (MPEP 2106.05(e)). The limitations are no more than mere automation of a mental process to obtain CDM group index, frequency domain and time domain cover codes according to DMR port index.
Regarding claims 14-18, respectively, depend on claim 13, and are without significantly more than the judicial exception itself as explained in claim 13. Thus claims 14-18 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 13.
6. Claims 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
In claim 13, a "computer-readable storage medium" is being recited; the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media.
Therefore, a transitory computer readable medium would reasonably be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as signal, per se.
Note: A review of the specification paragraphs [0478] reveals, the computer-readable storage medium is not limited. For example, the computer-readable storage medium may be a RAM (random-access memory, random-access memory) or a ROM (read-only memory, read-only memory).: [para 0481] The computer instructions may be stored in a computer-readable storage medium or may be transmitted from a computer-readable storage medium to another computer-readable storage medium. For example, the computer instructions may be transmitted from a website, computer, server, or data center to another website, computer, server, or data center in a wired (for example, a coaxial cable, an optical fiber, or a digital subscriber line (DSL)) or wireless (for example, infrared, radio, or microwave) manner. The computer-readable storage medium may be any usable medium accessible by the computer, or a data storage device, such as a server or a data center, integrating one or more usable media. The usable medium may be a magnetic medium (for example, a floppy disk, a hard disk, or a magnetic tape), an optical medium (for example, a DVD), a semiconductor medium (for example, a solid state disk (Solid State Disk, SSD)), or the like...}; here the description is clearly reciting storage medium as any medium with examples, this is an open ended statement i.e. the description does not state that the storage medium is only from the list of mediums, or excludes explicitly the transitory medium, as signals per se that is non-statutory subject matter.
Thus, this subject matter "computer readable storage medium" is not limited to that which falls within a statutory category of invention because it is limited to a process, machine, manufacture, or a composition of matter. Signal per se is a function descriptive material and a function descriptive material is non-statutory subject matter.
The Office suggests the following approach in an effort to assist the patent community in overcoming a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 in this situation in the Official Gazette Vol. 1351 page 212 dated February 23, 2010:
“In an effort to assist the patent community in overcoming a rejection or potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in this situation, the USPTO suggests the following approach. A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim.”
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Su et al (US 8,837,371B2) discloses mapping demodulation reference signal port (see title)
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELENE E TAYONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1675. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/HELENE E TAYONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631 January 10, 2026