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 .
Response to Amendment
2. Acknowledgement is made of the amendment filed 04/21/26.
Claims 1-12 and 19-30 of which claims 1, 7, 19 and 25 are independent, were pending in this application and have been considered below.
• Claims 1-3 and 7-9 are currently amended.
• Claims 13-18 are canceled.
• Claims 19-30 are newly added.
Response to Arguments
3. (i) Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 04/21/26, with respect to the rejection of claims 2-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims has been withdrawn because of amendments.
(ii) Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 3, 7-10 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 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Claims have been amended to include new limitations. The amendment has not remove the grounds for rejection of claims as abstract ideas.
(a). Applicant's argument: Amended claim 1 recites "obtaining code division multiplexing (CDM) group index, frequency-domain orthogonal cover codes (OCC) and time-domain OCC according to the DMRS port index; 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." The "obtaining" step in claim 1, in the context of real-time wireless signal transmission, is not a mental process at all. A human cannot practically perform this operation mentally in an active network. The examiner's characterization is therefore incorrect at the threshold step.
(b). Examiner's response: After careful review of the applicant's presented remarks
and position on the 35 USC 101 rejection of the claims, the Examiner respectfully
disagrees that the provided amendments and remarks remove the grounds for rejection of the noted claims as abstract ideas.
The additional elements, “receiving a downlink control information (DCI), the DCI comprising a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index:” are merely data gathering and insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution activity). (MPEP 2106.05 (g)). See full rejection of claims below
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 1-12 and 19-30 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 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.
The additional elements, “: receiving a downlink control information (DCI), the DCI comprising a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index:” are merely data gathering and insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution activity).
Specifically, the additional element, “a method, comprising, “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, DCI, 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)).
The additional elements, “: receiving a downlink control information (DCI), the DCI comprising a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index:” are merely data gathering and insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution activity).
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, DCI, 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 8-12 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 7.
With regards to claim 19, is directed to a mental process (abstract idea)
claim 19, Step 1: method claim.
Step 2A, Prong 1: the limitations, “obtaining code division multiplexing (CDM) group index, frequency-domain orthogonal cover codes (OCC) and time-domain OCC;” 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.
The additional elements, “: sending a downlink control information (DCI), wherein the DCI comprises a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index, wherein the DMRS port index corresponds to the CDM group index, the frequency-domain OCC and time-domain OCC.:” are merely data gathering and insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution activity).
Specifically, the additional element, “a method, comprising , “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, DCI, frequency domain and time domain cover codes according to DMR port index.
Regarding claims 20-24, respectively, depend on claim 19, and are without significantly more than the judicial exception itself as explained in claim 19. Thus claims 20-24 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 19.
With regards to claim 25, 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;” 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)).
The additional elements, “: send a downlink control information (DCI), wherein the DCI comprises a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) port index, wherein the DMRS port index corresponds to the CDM group index, the frequency-domain OCC and the time-domain OCC.:” are merely data gathering and insignificant extra-solution activity (pre-solution activity).
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, DCI, frequency domain and time domain cover codes according to DMR port index.
Regarding claims 26-30, respectively, depend on claim 25, and are without significantly more than the judicial exception itself as explained in claim 25. Thus claims 26-30 are rejected for the same reason as in claim 25.
Conclusion
5. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
6. 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 June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights