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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This communication is in response to the RCE of 6/10/2026. Accordingly, Claims 1, 5, 7, 12-13, 15-18, 20-24, 29-30 are currently pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1, 5, 24 (dependent claims also being rejected since they are dependent upon rejected claims set forth) is 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 1 recites the subject matter “a threshold in a first portion” in line 8 and “a threshold was sensed” in line 17. It is however unclear on if the subject matter of “a threshold” is referring to the threshold introduced in line 5 or different thresholds. Examiner suggests clarifying such subject matter and believes such subject matter should read “the threshold”.
Dependent Claim 5 recites the subject matter “a size of the time window” in line 2. It is however unclear on if such subject matter of “a size of the time window” is referring to “a size of the time window” introduced in independent claim 1 in line 16 or a different size of the time window. Examiner suggests clarifying such subject matter and believes such subject matter should read “the size of the time window”.
Claim 24 recites the subject matter “a threshold in a first portion” in line 6 and “a threshold was sensed” in line 14. It is however unclear on if the subject matter of “a threshold” is referring to the threshold introduced in line 3 or different thresholds. Examiner suggests clarifying such subject matter and believes such subject matter should read “the threshold”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16, 17-18, 20-23, 29-30 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
16, and 29 are allowable over the prior art of record since the cited references taken individually or in combination fail to particularly disclose communicate a size of a time window, wherein the time window comprises a plurality of time intervals, the size of the time window based at least in part on a number of previous time intervals during which interference above a threshold was sensed. It is noted that the closest prior art, Li et al. (US 2019/0357224), in view of Park et al. (US 2018/0110057), discloses performing channel sensing and/or interference measuring from a first sensing location in a sequential order of pre-configured candidate sensing locations; where in response to determining that a sensing result of the channel sensing and/or a measure result of the interference measuring at a nth candidate sensing location is less than a preset threshold, determining a start location of the nth candidate sensing location as a location for starting data transmission, where n=1, 2 . . . m, m is a total number of locations configured for the channel sensing. However the stated prior art fails to disclose or render obvious to the above underline limitations as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN HOANG NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-8398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Kwang Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/NGUYEN H NGO/Examiner, Art Unit 2473
