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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2-13 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2 (and 18), the claim states: “receive a first configuration for a resource, wherein the first configuration comprises a first parameter indicating a time-domain attribute associated with the resource, and the time- domain resource is hard, soft, unavailable, or a combination thereof, wherein a hard time-domain attribute indicates that the resource is available for the wireless node to schedule communications, and wherein a soft time-domain attribute indicates that the resource is not available for the wireless node to schedule communications until the resource is indicated available by further signaling; receive a second configuration for the resource, wherein the second configuration comprises a second parameter indicating a frequency-domain attribute associated with the resource, and
the frequency-domain attribute is hard, soft, unavailable, or some combination thereof, wherein a soft frequency-domain attribute indicates that the resource is not available for the wireless node to schedule communications until the resource is indicated available by further signaling; determine an attribute for the resource based on the time-domain attribute and the frequency-domain attribute, wherein the attribute is hard, soft, unavailable, or some combination thereof” which was not described in the original specification. Applicant states support for the amendments can be found in the specification but does not cite any paragraphs. For example, the published specification appears to mention hard and soft resources once in Para [0067]. It does not appear to state time-domain resources are hard, soft or unavailable and frequency domain attribute is also hard, soft or unavailable. The specification does not appear to even use the term “attribute” nor a “frequency domain attribute”. It also does not appear to state anything about determining an attribute for a resource based on the time-domain attribute and the frequency-domain attribute.
Claims 2-13 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claim 2 (and 18), the claim states: “determine an attribute for the resource based on the time-domain attribute and the frequency-domain attribute, wherein the attribute is hard, soft, unavailable, or some combination thereof” which was not described in a way to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the invention. The specification does not ever mention an attribute, nor how to determine an attribute based on a time-domain attribute and a frequency-domain attribute.
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.
Claims 3-11 and 19-21 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the physical channel" in line 2, “the first entity” in line 4, “the second entity” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similar insufficient antecedent basis for the other dependent claims, 4-6 and 18-21 as well.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the information” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similar insufficient antecedent basis for the other dependent claims, 8-11 as well.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the references do not disclose the amended limitations. In response, arguments are moot in view of the new 112 rejections. The Applicant did not cite what paragraphs in the specification support the new amendments. There does not appear to be any support nor is the limitation enabled. Further there are 112 clarity rejections for the dependent claims as well.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571) 272-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:30-18:00 (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Vu can be reached on (571) 272-3155. The fax 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.
/KEVIN M CUNNINGHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
