CTFR 17/621,204 CTFR 81498 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 9-12, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo (US 2012/0195291, hereinafter Kuo, previously cited by applicant on IDS) in view of Ahn et al. (US 2013/0279423, hereinafter Ahn) . Regarding claims 1, 10, and 20. Kuo teaches a wireless communication terminal, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for interference reporting (title and abstract) , comprising: an antenna (figure 2 item 252) ; a memory (figure 2 item 272) ; and a processor, respectively connected to the antenna and the memory, configured to, by executable program stored in the memory, control the antenna to send and receive a wireless signal and execute the following operation (figure 2 item 270) : reporting, by a terminal, a time division multiplexing (TDM) pattern according to coexistence interference (figure 6, item 602; par. 39 and 44; UE initiates a TDM solution to avoid in-device coexistence interference; UE reports assistance information to eNB…the assistant information may contain a desired TDM pattern), wherein the coexistence interference is interference caused by different frequency bands in the terminal (par. 5, According to one aspect, a method is disclosed for coexistence interference avoidance in a user equipment (UE) equipped with a first radio based on LTE radio technology or LTE-Advanced radio technology and a second radio based on another radio technology…thus different frequency bands) , and the TDM pattern is used to indicate (par. 44…For example, the TDM pattern may be a scheduling period (or active time) and an unscheduled period (or inactive time)) at least one of the following: an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol or a slot that is available for a communication module imposing the interference or subjected to the interference in the terminal, (par. 44, TDM pattern may be a scheduling period…par. 33, scheduling period is a period in the TDM cycle during which the LTE UE may be scheduled to transmit or receive…par. 44, assistant information may also contain an interferer mode, thus there would be coexistence interference with ISM radio during periods which the LTE is transmitting/receiving) or an OFDM symbol or a slot that is not available for the communication module imposing the interference or subjected to the interference in the terminal (par. 44, assistant information may also contain an interferer mode….TDM pattern may be a an unscheduled period…par. 33, unscheduled period is a period in the TDM cycle during which the LTE UE is not scheduled to transmit or receive, thus no interference for the ISM radio to operate). (***Examiners note: The above limitations use alternative language (or) and based on the “or” used in the limitation, only one of the alternatives need to be shown to read on the claim as written. This applies to “symbol or slot” the “available OR not available for communication module” and for “imposing the interference” or “subjected to the interference”***) However, Kuo does not specifically disclose the TDM pattern indicates an OFDM symbol or slot available or unavailable for the communication module imposing the interference or subjected to the interference in the terminal. Ahn, in a similar field of endeavor teaches a method and device for controlling coexistence interference (title and abstract) . Ahn teaches the idea of an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol or a slot (par. 44 notes the system is not limited to specific access schemes, and notes OFDMA as an access scheme that can be adopted for the system) . Ahn further teaches the TDM pattern indicates a symbol or slot that is available (or unavailable) for a communication module imposing the interference or subjected to the interference in the terminal in figure 9 and par. 98-99, and 103, where it discusses sending the assistance information to the eNB including useable and unusable band indicators based on the determined in-device coexistence interference determined by the UE caused by other RF modules. Here, the bands read on OFDM slot. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, to include the indications of useable (available) and non-usable (unavailable) resources based on coexistence interference as in Ahn with the method and system of avoiding in-device coexistence interference as in Kuo. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for simple exchange of coexistence information between UE and eNB so that uncertainly in controlling interference can be reduced or removed (Ahn, par. 20) . Regarding claim 2, 11 and 21 , Kuo further teaches: when the coexistence interference is that at least one of a long term evolution (LTE) frequency band and a new radio (NR) frequency band is interfered, a transmission direction of a corresponding slot is the uplink transmission; (par. 31, LTE uplink transmission causes coexistence interference) when the coexistence interference is that a WIFI frequency band, a Bluetooth frequency band or a global navigation satellite system frequency band is interfered, the transmission direction of the corresponding slot is the downlink reception; when the co-existence interference is that the at least one of the long term evolution (LTE) frequency band and the new radio (NR) frequency band is interfered, a transmission direction of a corresponding OFDM symbol is the uplink transmission. ***Examiners note: The above claim uses alternative language (“at least one of”, “or”) and based on these used in the limitations above, only one of the alternatives need to be shown to read on the claim as written. Regarding claim 3 and 12, Kuo further teaches, wherein: the TDM pattern is indicated with slot configuration information, wherein the slot configuration information is used to indicate at least one of the following: an OFDM symbol for the uplink transmission; an OFDM symbol for the downlink reception, a slot for the uplink transmission (par. 44, TDM pattern may be a scheduling period…par. 33, scheduling period is a period in the TDM cycle during which the LTE UE may be scheduled to transmit or receive…thus a slot for uplink if the LTE UE is scheduled to transmit) ; and a slot for the downlink reception (par. 44, TDM pattern may be a scheduling period…par. 33, scheduling period is a period in the TDM cycle during which the LTE UE may be scheduled to transmit or receive…thus a slot for downlink if the LTE UE is scheduled to receive) ; or , the TDM pattern is indicated with time division duplex (TDD) uplink -downlink configuration information. ***Examiners note: The above claim uses alternative language (“at least one of”, “or”) and based on these used in the limitations above, only one of the alternatives need to be shown to read on the claim as written . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4, 9, 13 and 18 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo in view of Ahn, in further view of Ahn et al. (US 2013/0195013, hereinafter Ahn’013) . Regarding claim 4 and 13, The combination of Kuo and Ahn teach the limitations of claims 1 and 10 above. However they do not specifically disclose wherein, the TDM pattern is indicated with at least one of the following: the TDM pattern is indicated with a bitmap; the TDM pattern is indicated with a starting position and a length of consecutively distributed time domain resources, when available time domain resources are consecutively distributed; the TDM pattern is indicated with a starting position and a length of consecutively distributed time domain sub-resources of discretely distributed time domain resources, when the available time domain resources are not consecutively distributed. Ahn’013, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches wherein the TDM pattern is indicated with at least one of the following: the TDM pattern is indicated with a bitmap; the TDM pattern is indicated with a starting position and a length of consecutively distributed time domain resources, when available time domain resources are consecutively distributed; the TDM pattern is indicated with a starting position and a length of consecutively distributed time domain sub-resources of discretely distributed time domain resources, when the available time domain resources are not consecutively distributed (see para: 0070, pattern given as bitmap) . ***Examiners note: The above claim uses alternative language (“at least one of” and “or”) and based on this language used in the limitation, only one of the alternatives need to be shown to read on the claim as written. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, to include the teachings of Ahn’013 with the combined method and system of avoiding in-device coexistence interference as in Kuo and Ahn. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for simple solution to avoid or control in device coexistence information (Ahn, par. 7) . Regarding claim 9 and 18, Ahn’013 further disclose wherein: TDM patterns of different cells are indicated separately (see Fig. 15, para: 0041, 0044) ; or, TDM patterns of different frequency points are indicated separately. ***Examiners note: The above claim uses alternative language (or) and based on the “or” used in the limitation, only one of the alternatives need to be shown to read on the claim as written. The motivation for combining can be found in the independent claim rejection above . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 5-8 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo in view of Ahn as applied to claim 1, 10 and 20 above, and further in view of Paladugu et al (US PGPUB 2020/0145888.) Regarding claim 5 and 14 , Kuo and Ahn fail to teach wherein the method further comprises: indicating a reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or a slot. However, in a similar endeavor, Paladugu disclose coordination of spatial subcarrier spacing of a OFDM slot (see para: 0043, 0045, 0046.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to utilize subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or a slot as taught by Paladugu with the combined teachings of Kuo and Ahn for the purpose of automatically sharing spectrum between inter-connected systems as to minimize delay in accessing network resources in a communication network. Regarding claim 6 and 15 , Paladugu further disclose wherein the indicating the reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot (see para: 0030-0031 & 0045-0046) comprises: indicating the reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot with a bit length occupied by the TDM pattern (see para: 0147, 0148, bit length associated with TDM pattern) , wherein different bit lengths correspond to different reference subcarrier spacings (see para: 0137, 0152-0153, 0159, different bit lengths with different resources/subcarriers.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to utilize reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot comprises: indicating the reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot with a bit length occupied by the TDM pattern, wherein different bit lengths correspond to different reference subcarrier spacings as taught by Paladugu with the combined teachings of Kuo and Ahn for the purpose of automatically sharing spectrum between inter-connected systems as to minimize delay in accessing network resources in a communication network. Regarding claim 7 and 16, Paladugu further discloses reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot comprises (See para:0045, 0046, 0047) : indicating an uplink reference subcarrier spacing and a downlink reference subcarrier spacing when frequency division duplex (FDD) is used (see para:0030, 0031, 0045, 0046.) The motivation for combining can be found in the rejection above. Regarding claim 8 and 17, Paladagu further disclose, wherein the indicating the reference subcarrier spacing of the OFDM symbol or the slot comprises: when there is a supplement uplink carrier, indicating a reference subcarrier spacing of the supplement uplink carrier and a reference subcarrier spacing of a non-supplement uplink carrier (see para:0030, 0031, 0045, 0046, 0047). The motivation for combining can be found in the rejection above . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the 892 all disclose features related to the claimed invention, such as coexistence interference detection/indication and interference management, and thus are pertinent to applicant’s disclosure . 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL THIER whose telephone number is (571)272-2832. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 AM - 4:00 PM, Fri 7:00 AM-10:00 AM. 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. 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. /Michael Thier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2474 Michael Thier Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 2 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 4 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 5 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 6 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 7 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 8 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 9 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 10 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 17/621,204 Page 11 Art Unit: 2474
Prosecution Insights