UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/467,827
`
`03/23/2017
`
`TETSUYA YAMAMOTO
`
`731456.430C1
`
`2872
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`LINDENBAUM' ALAN LOUIS
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2466
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/10/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/467,827
`Examiner
`ALAN L LINDEN BAUM
`
`Applicant(s)
`YAMAMOTO et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`2466
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 13 July 2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`12—29 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 12—29 is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)D accepted or b)l:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)I:J Some”
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1..
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.[:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) C] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180830
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 2
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`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 12-29 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 12 and 21 recite ”receiving a DCI
`
`and generating a DMRS for a PUSCH using one
`
`combination out of a plurality of combinations of cyclic shifts and orthogonal sequences based on the
`
`DCI”; but claims 12 and 21 also recite ”said one combination used for generating the DMRS is a specific
`
`combination out of the plurality of combinations and not dynamically changed by the DCI.” These two
`
`limitations conflict with each other. ”Receiving a DCI and generating DMRS for a PUSCH using one
`
`combination out of a plurality of combinations of cyclic shifts and orthogonal sequences based on the
`
`DCI” is interpreted as dynamically changing, by the DCI, the combination used for generating the DM RS.
`
`5.
`
`For the purposes of Examiner, the limitation ”not dynamically changed by the DC
`
`III
`
`is interpreted
`
`to mean that the combination remains unchanged/fixed for a limited duration.
`
`6.
`
`Dependent claims 13-20 and 22-29 are rejected because they depend from claims 12 and 21.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`7.
`
`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.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 12-14, 17-23 and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by
`
`Pajukoski et al. (US 2014/0254536).
`
`9.
`
`Regarding claim 12, Pajukoski discloses a communication device (Pajukoski, paragraph [0003],
`
`lines 1-3, MTC communication) comprising:
`
`10.
`
`a receiver, which, in operation, receives downlink control information (DCI) transmitted from a
`
`base station (Pajukoski, Fig. 1, eNodeB communicates with UE; paragraph [0046], lines 1-5, uplink
`
`resources signaled to a user device by RRC signaling or broadcasting);
`
`11.
`
`circuitry (Pajukoski, paragraph [0080], circuits), which, in operation that generates a
`
`demodulation reference signal (DMRS) for a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (Pajukoski,
`
`paragraph [0039], lines 1-3, DMRS for PUSCH; paragraph [0047], allocation may comprise DMRS SCI field
`
`indicating a spreading code and a cyclic shift orthogonal cover code used for generating a DMRS; user
`
`device may transmit on the PUSCH) using one combination out of a plurality of combinations of cyclic
`
`shifts and orthogonal sequences (Pajukoski, paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DM RS Cyclic Shift Indicator
`
`(CSI), indicating a spreading code and a cyclic shift orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC); paragraph
`
`[0048], code division multiplexing) based on the DCI (Pajukoski, paragraph [0046], lines 1-5, uplink
`
`resources signaled to a user device by RRC signaling or broadcasting); and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 4
`
`12.
`
`a transmitter, which, in operation, transmits, to the base station, the PUSCH and the generated
`
`DMRS (Pajukoski, paragraph [0039], lines 1-3 DMRS for PUSCH transmitted in the uplink; paragraph
`
`[0047]),
`
`13.
`
`wherein when the communication device is configured in a coverage enhancement mode
`
`(Pajukoski, paragraph [0034], lines 1-5, MTC coverage enhancement), in which the PUSCH is allowed to
`
`be transmitted with repetitions spanning a plurality of subframes (Pajukoski, paragraph [0037], lines 1-9,
`
`subframe bundling, where a single transmission block repeated over 4 consecutive sub-frames), said one
`
`combination used for generating the DMRS is a specific combination out of the plurality of combinations
`
`(Pajukoski, paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DMRS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI), indicating a cyclic shift
`
`orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC); paragraph [0048], code division multiplexing) and not dynamically
`
`changed by the DCI (Pajukoski, ; paragraph [0046], lines 1-5, uplink resources signaled to a user device
`
`by RRC signaling or broadcasting; paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DM RS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI),
`
`indicating a cyclic shift orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC); after being notified to the user device,
`
`information about cyclic shift and OCC for DM RS is used by the user device without being changed;
`
`paragraph [0054], indication for a user device to use % or more specific uplink resources may be
`
`included into an uplink grant message, and may be a single bit or codepoint).
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 13, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 12,
`
`wherein when the communication device is configured in the coverage enhancement mode (Pajukoski,
`
`paragraph [0034], lines 1-5, MTC coverage enhancement), said one combination used for generating the
`
`DMRS is fixed by the DCI (Pajukoski, ; paragraph [0046], lines 1-5, uplink resources signaled to a user
`
`device by RRC signaling or broadcasting; paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DMRS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI),
`
`indicating a cyclic shift orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC); after being notified to the user device,
`
`information about cyclic shift and OCC for DM RS is used by the user device without being changed).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 5
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 14, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 12,
`
`wherein when the communication device is configured in the coverage enhancement mode (Pajukoski,
`
`paragraph [0034], lines 1-5, MTC coverage enhancement), said one combination used for generating the
`
`DMRS is determined in advance between the communication device and the base station (Pajukoski, ;
`
`paragraph [0046], lines 1-5, uplink resources signaled to a user device by RRC signaling or broadcasting;
`
`paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DM RS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI), indicating a cyclic shift orthogonal cover
`
`code (DM RS OCC); information about cyclic shift and OCC for DM RS is notified to the user device in
`
`advance of being used by the user device).
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 12,
`
`wherein when the communication device is configured in the coverage enhancement mode (Pajukoski,
`
`paragraph [0034], lines 1-5, MTC coverage enhancement), said circuitry, in operation, multiplies the
`
`PUSCH transmitted with repetitions spanning the plurality of subframes by one code sequence out of a
`
`plurality of code sequences (Pajukoski, paragraph [0047], lines 1-12, DMRS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI),
`
`indicating a cyclic shift orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC); paragraph [0061], spreading extended over
`
`multiple subframes by applying a cover code between repeated subframes).
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 17,
`
`wherein said one code sequence is determined using a field for indicating the combination used for the
`
`DMRS in the DCI (Pajukoski, paragraph [0053], lines 1-18, DM RS CSI field).
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 18,
`
`wherein the plurality of code sequences are respectively associated with a plurality of values (Pajukoski,
`
`paragraph [0053], lines 1-18, CDM-based MTC format derived from MCS field value).
`
`19.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 19,
`
`wherein the plurality of values indicated by bits constituting the field are respectively associated with a
`
`plurality of combinations of the code sequences, the cyclic shifts, and the orthogonal sequences
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 6
`
`(Pajukoski, paragraph [0053], lines 1-18, CDM-based MTC format derived from MCS field value;
`
`paragraph [0054], field value indicated by bits).
`
`20.
`
`Claims 21-23 and 26-29 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claims 12-14 and
`
`17-20.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`21.
`
`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.
`
`22.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere C0,, 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.
`
`23.
`
`Claims 15, 16, 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Pajukoski in view of Takeda et al. (US 2015/0036651).
`
`24.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 12,
`
`wherein when the communication device is configured in the coverage enhancement mode (Pajukoski,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 7
`
`paragraph [0034], lines 1-5, MTC coverage enhancement), said transmitter, in operation, transmits the
`
`PUSCH and the DM RS (Pajukoski, paragraph [0039], lines 1-3, DMRS for PUSCH).
`
`25.
`
`Takeda discloses that MTC communication occurs in a narrow band (Takeda, paragraph [0028],
`
`MTC communication in narrow band).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art, at the time of the invention, to use a narrow band for the MTC communication in the invention of
`
`Pajukoski. The motivation to combine the references would have been to use known methods for
`
`performing MTC communication.
`
`26.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Pajukoski discloses the communication device according to claim 12,
`
`wherein said transmitter, in operation, transmits the PUSCH and the DMRS (Pajukoski, paragraph [0039],
`
`lines 1-3, DM RS for PUSCH)
`
`27.
`
`Takeda discloses using a frequency hopping in a narrow band (Takeda, paragraph [0028], MTC
`
`communication in narrow band; paragraph [0039], hopping resources allocation).
`
`It would have been
`
`obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to use a narrow band and
`
`frequency hopping for the MTC communication in the invention of Pajukoski. The motivation to
`
`combine the references would have been to use known methods for performing MTC communication.
`
`28.
`
`Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under substantially the same rationale as claims 15 and 16.
`
`29.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed July 13, 2018 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`persuasive.
`
`30.
`
`Applicant asserts that the claims are patentable because Pajukoski allegedly does not teach that
`
`generating a DMRS based on the DCI. However, this is incorrect. Pajukoski discloses, in paragraph
`
`[0046], that uplink resources signaled to a user device by RRC signaling or broadcasting. The signaling of
`
`uplink resources signaled to a user device by RRC signaling or broadcasting is interpreted as Downlink
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 8
`
`Control Information (DCI). Pajukoski further discloses, in paragraphs [0039] and [0046], that resource
`
`allocation may comprise a DMRS Cyclic Shift Indicator (CSI) field, indicating a spreading code and a cyclic
`
`shift orthogonal cover code (DM RS OCC) used for generating a DM RS. Accordingly, the DM RS is
`
`generated based on the resource allocation, which is Downlink Control Information (DCI).
`
`31.
`
`Applicant further asserts that the claims are patentable because Pajukoski allegedly does not
`
`teach that the DCI does not dynamically change a combination of cyclic shifts and orthogonal sequences
`
`used for generating the DMRS. However, that limitation is indefinite, because ”Receiving a DCI and
`
`generating DMRS for a PUSCH using one combination out of a plurality of combinations of cyclic shifts
`
`and orthogonal sequences based on the DCI” is interpreted as dynamically changing, by the DCI, the
`
`combination used for generating the DMRS.
`
`32.
`
`Applicant further argues that Pajukoski allegedly teaches away from the combination being ”not
`
`dynamically changed,” because paragraph [0046] of Pajukoski states that ”The allocation is typically
`
`carried out dynamically, thus a user device may automatically change its transmission format.”
`
`However, Applicant’s claim recites steps that describe selecting [dynamically changing] the cyclic shift
`
`and orthogonal sequence based on the Downlink Control Information (DCI), just as is described in
`
`Pajukoski. Further, Pjukoski’s statement that ”the allocation is typically carried out dynamically,”
`
`discloses that an allocation may sometimes NOT be dynamic.
`
`Conclusion
`
`”fir-its ACTEON i5 MADE FENAL Applicant is reminded of the extension of time poiicy as set forth
`
`in 32:" CPR 1.136(ai.
`
`A shortened statutory period for repiy to this finai action is set to expire THREE MON'E'HS from
`
`the maiiing date of this action. in the event a first repiy is tiied within TWG MON'E'HS of the maiiing date
`
`of this finai action and the advisory action is not maiied Lintii after the end of the THREE—MONTH
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 9
`
`shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period wiii expire on the date the advisory
`
`action is ntaiieri, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR j}..135(a) wiii be caicuiated from the meiiing
`
`date of the advisory action. in no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SEX
`
`MONTHS from the rnaiiing date of this final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to ALAN LOUIS LINDENBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-3858. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
`
`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,
`
`Faruk Hamza can be reached on (571) 272-7969. 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.
`
`/A. L./
`Examiner, Art Unit 2466
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/467,827
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`/CHR|STOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
`
`Page 10
`
`