DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the pending claims, 1-30, received 10 December 2024. Accordingly, the detailed action of claims 1-30 is as follows:
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/09/2026 and 03/06/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11, 13-16, 18-19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated Elkotby et al (US 20260074939 A1, hereafter referred to as Elkotby).
Regarding claim 1, Elkotby teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Elkotby [0062]), comprising:
at least one memory (Elkotby [0062]); and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory (Elkotby [0067]) and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor (Elkotby [0067]) is configured to:
receive, from a network entity, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission in a control resource set (CORESET) (Elkotby [0173-0174] teaches a WTRU receiving from the base station a CORESET configuration including a time domain configuration and frequency domain configuration) spanning multiple symbols (Elkotby [Fig 5a, 5c and 0174] teaches the CORESET configuration as a multi-symbol CORSET configuration), wherein the PDCCH transmission includes multiple demodulation reference signals (DMRS) (Elkotby [0142] teaches the corset configuration indicates a number of additional DMRS symbols such that a plurality of DMRS signals are present [Fig 5a, 5c]) having a DMRS pattern based on a duration of the CORESET (Elkotby [0176] teaches the DMRS symbols’ location is based on a set of preconfigured patterns that depend on the time domain configuration and additional DMRS indication for a CORESET), wherein the DMRS pattern is in at least one of a time domain or a frequency domain (Elkotby [0176, 0191] teaches the preconfigured patterns are depending on a time-domain configuration and frequency-domain configuration [0176, 0193]); and
perform a channel estimation based on the DMRS (Elkotby [0193, 0107] teaches the DMRS is used for channel estimation).
Regarding claim 2, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor (Elkotby [0063, 0066]), wherein to receive the PDCCH transmission, the at least one processor is configured to receive the PDCCH transmission via the transceiver (Elkotby [0066 and 0061] teaches the WTRU communicating with the base station including receiving PDCCH signals from the base station [0204]), and wherein the multiple symbols include more than three symbols (Elkotby [0174 and Fig 5a, 5c] teaches the CORESET configuration includes 3, 4, 5 or 6 symbols).
Regarding claim 3, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the DMRS pattern comprises multiple DMRS clusters in the time domain (Elkotby [Fig 5a, 5c] teaches a plurality of DMRS signals in the time domain), and wherein at least two DMRS clusters of the multiple DMRS clusters are separated by one or more symbols that contain no DMRS transmissions (Elkotby [Fig 5a, 5c] teaches the DMRS mapping pattern instances are separated by one or more OFDM symbols).
Regarding claim 4, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 3, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the at least two DMRS clusters have a same DMRS density in the frequency domain (Elkotby [0139] teaches the same frequency domain mapping configured for different symbols such that the same frequency domain mapping pattern is configured for all symbols).
Regarding claim 6, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 3, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the at least two DMRS clusters include a first DMRS cluster comprising at least one symbol at a beginning of the CORESET and a second DMRS cluster comprising at least one symbol at an end of the CORESET (Elkotby [Fig 5a] teaches a 4-symbol, 5-symbol CORESET and [Fig 5C] teaches a 6-symbol CORESET with one symbol at the beginning and end for DMRS), and wherein the first DMRS cluster has a first DMRS density in the frequency domain across the at least one symbol in the first DMRS cluster, and the second DMRS cluster has a second DMRS density in the frequency domain across the at least one symbol in the second DMRS cluster (Elkotby [0139] teaches the same or different frequency mappings, including REs/PRBs, for different symbols).
Regarding claim 7, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 6, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the first DMRS density is equal to the second DMRS density (Elkotby [0139] teaches the same frequency domain mapping configured for different symbols such that the same frequency domain mapping pattern is configured for all symbols).
Regarding claim 9, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 3, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, via radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a CORESET configuration (Elkotby [0142, 173] teaches using higher layer signaling, including RRC, to deliver the CORESET configuration), wherein the CORESET configuration indicates the DMRS pattern (Elkotby [0142]).
Regarding claim 10, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 9, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the CORESET configuration further comprises one or more of: a number of clusters in the multiple DMRS clusters (Elkotby [0138] teaches a pre-configuration or dynamic configuration of a number of additional DMRS symbols [0176])), or a DMRS density for each DMRS cluster in the multiple DMRS clusters (Elkotby [0139] teaches configuring a subset of REs of each PRB, a fixed set of REs in each PRB or different number of REs and PRBs as the frequency domain mapping pattern).
Regarding claim 11, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 3, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the DMRS pattern is associated with a CORESET index (Elkotby [0173] teaches the CORESET configuration comprising DMRS configuration also includes a CORESET index).
Regarding claim 13, Elkotby teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity (Elkotby [0050-0057] teaches a base station), comprising:
at least one memory (Elkotby [0050-0057] teaches a base station); and
at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory (Elkotby [0050-0057] teaches a base station), the at least one processor is configured to:
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission in a control resource set (CORESET) (Elkotby [0173-0174] teaches a WTRU receiving from the base station a CORESET configuration including a time domain configuration and frequency domain configuration) spanning multiple symbols (Elkotby [Fig 5a, 5c and 0174] teaches the CORESET configuration as a multi-symbol CORSET configuration), wherein the PDCCH transmission includes multiple demodulation reference signals (DMRS) (Elkotby [0142] teaches the corset configuration indicates a number of additional DMRS symbols such that a plurality of DMRS signals are present [Fig 5a, 5c]) having a DMRS pattern based on a duration of the CORESET (Elkotby [0176] teaches the DMRS symbols’ location is based on a set of preconfigured patterns that depend on the time domain configuration and additional DMRS indication for a CORESET), wherein the DMRS pattern is in at least one of a time domain or a frequency domain (Elkotby [0176, 0191] teaches the preconfigured patterns are depending on a time-domain configuration and frequency-domain configuration [0176, 0193]); and
and communicate with the UE based on the DMRS (Elkotby [0240] teaches transmitting a PDSCH to the WTRU).
Regarding claims 14-16, 18-19 and 21-23, they do not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claims 2-4, 6-7, 9-11.
Therefore claims 14-16, 18-19 and 21-23 are rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claims 2-4, 6-7 and 9-11.
Regarding claims 25-28 and 30, they do not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claims 1-4 and 13.
Therefore claims 25-28 and 30 are rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding 1-4 and 3.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 5, 8, 17, 20, 29 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elkotby et al (US 20260074939 A1, hereafter referred to as Elkotby) as applied above regarding claim 3, further in view of Yu et al (US 20250317249 A1, hereafter referred to as Yu).
Regarding claim 5, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 3, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the at least two DMRS clusters include an earlier DMRS cluster and a later DMRS cluster located after the earlier DMRS cluster (Elkotby [Fig 5a, 5c ] teaches a plurality of DMRS symbols including a first and additional DMRS [0176]), wherein the earlier DMRS cluster has a first DMRS density in the frequency domain, and the later DMRS cluster has a second DMRS density in the frequency domain (Elkotby [0139] teaches a frequency domain allocation pattern, corresponding to REs/PRBs in one or more symbols containing the DMRSs), and wherein the first DMRS density is different from the second DMRS density (Elkotby [0139] teaches different types of frequency domain mapping patters are configured over the different symbols).
However, Elkotby does not explicitly teach [the first DMRS density] is an integer multiple of the second DMRS density.
Yu, in an analogous art, teaches [the first DMRS density] is an integer multiple of the second DMRS density (Yu [0105] teaches the frequency domain density of the first-type DMRS is 1/N of the frequency domain density of a second-type DMRS where N is an integer greater than 1).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Elkotby in view of Yu in order to configure the first and second DMRS having different densities, as taught by Elkotby, wherein the density is an integer multiple of the second, as taught by Yu.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to improve channel estimation precision, accuracy and receiving performance without changing data transmission performance (Yu [0008-0010]).
Regarding claim 8, Elkotby teaches the limitations of claim 6, as rejected above.
Additionally, Elkotby teaches the apparatus wherein the first DMRS density is different from the second DMRS density (Elkotby [0139] teaches the different frequency domain mapping configured for different symbols such that the different types of frequency domain mapping pattern are configured for different symbols).
However, Elkotby does not explicitly teach [the first DMRS density] is an integer multiple of the second DMRS density.
Yu, in an analogous art, teaches [the first DMRS density] is an integer multiple of the second DMRS density (Yu [0105] teaches the frequency domain density of the first-type DMRS is 1/N of the frequency domain density of a second-type DMRS where N is an integer greater than 1).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Elkotby in view of Yu in order to configure the first and second DMRS having different densities, as taught by Elkotby, wherein the density is an integer multiple of the second, as taught by Yu.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to improve channel estimation precision, accuracy and receiving performance without changing data transmission performance (Yu [0008-0010]).
Regarding claims 17 and 20, they do not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claims 5 and 8.
Therefore claims 17 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claims 5 and 8.
Regarding claim 29, it does not teach or further limit over the limitations presented above with respect to claim 5.
Therefore, claim 29 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 24 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Goyal et al (US 20260074940 A1);
Kwak et al (US 20220417911 A1);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEAN TOKUTA whose telephone number is (571)272-5145. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 630-430.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 5712727952. 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.
SHEAN TOKUTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2446
/SHEAN TOKUTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419
