CTFR 18/264,131 CTFR 92506 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 Amendment The Amendment filed 02/02/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 11, 15, 24 and 28 have been amended. Claims 4-10, 17-23, 25-27 and 28-30 are canceled. Claims 24 and 25 are added. Claims 1-19 are pending in this application. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 02/02/2026, have been fully considered and entered but they are not persuasive. Argument: … The claim already recites sufficient detail for this determined initiated node in the next claim element of claim 1 by reciting that the UE determines "a transmission pattern that includes one or more idle periods based at least in part on a fixed frame period (FFP) structure associated with the initiating node that acquired the current channel occupancy time." The claim, as amended, further recites that the UE refrains from "transmitting during the one or more idle periods, wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the UE and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs." Applicant respectfully submits that there are no clarity issues with the claims. Reply, Examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant did not present any argument or explanation; on the contrary, they added the rejected parts from the dependent claims into the independent claims: How the one or more idle periods include an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs in addition to the at least an idle period associated with the UE, if there is only one idle period exists for the one or more idle periods !!! If the applicant means more than one idle period, applicant is advised to use multiple idle periods instead of one or more idle periods. To help advance the prosecution, the examiner considered the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) that is satisfied by only one idle period. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 Claims 1-3, 11-16, 24 and 28 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. Regarding claim 1, Lines 9-10, it is also confusing and ambiguous for reciting "refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods, wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the UE, and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs." how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs, if there is only one idle period exists for the one or more idle periods !!! For broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim, it is satisfied by only one idle period that can be either “an idle period associated with the UE” or “an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs”, and given that claim 2 recites “an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node”, this can also satisfy the claim. Regarding claim 2, lines 1-2, it is confusing and ambiguous for reciting "the one or more idle periods include an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node" since the one or more idle periods already include at least an idle period associated with the UE according to claim 1, how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node if there is only one idle period exists !!! Regarding claim 11, Lines 9-10, it is also confusing and ambiguous for reciting "refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods, wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the TRP, and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs." how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs, if there is only one idle period exists for the one or more idle periods!!! For broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim, it is satisfied by only one idle period that can be either “an idle period associated with the UE” or “an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs”, and given that claim 12 recites “an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node”, and claim 14 recites “include an idle period associated with the UE”, these can also satisfy the claim. Regarding claim 12, lines 1-2, it is confusing and ambiguous for reciting "the one or more idle periods include an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node" since the one or more idle periods already include at least an idle period associated with the UE according to claim 11, how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period in the FFP structure associated with the initiating node, if there is only one idle period exists !!! Regarding claim 14, lines 1-2, it is confusing and ambiguous for reciting " include an idle period associated with the UE." since the one or more idle periods already include at least an idle period associated with the UE according to claim 11, how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period associated with the UE, if there is only one idle period exists !!! Regarding claim 24, Lines 9-10, it is also confusing and ambiguous for reciting "refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods, wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the UE, and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs." how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs, if there is only one idle period exists for the one or more idle periods !!! For broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim, it is satisfied by only one idle period that can be either “an idle period associated with the UE” or “an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs”. Regarding claim 28, Lines 9-10, it is also confusing and ambiguous for reciting "refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods, wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the TRP, and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs." how can the one or more idle periods include an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs, if there is only one idle period exists for the one or more idle periods? For broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim, it is satisfied by only one idle period that can be either “an idle period associated with the UE” or “an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs”. 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 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 of this title, 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, 11-16, 24 and 28 (as best understood by the examiner) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awadin et al. (WO 2021062118 A1), hereinafter Awadin, in view of Chien et al. (US 20230146487 A1) hereinafter Chien . Regarding claim 1, Awadin teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) (An FBE may comprise equipment [0054]-[0058]; Fig. 1), comprising: determining, from among the UE and multiple transmit receive points (TRPs ) (gNBs, TRPs and UEs [0150]) communicating with the UE in a frame based equipment (FBE) mode (An FBE may comprise equipment [0054]-[0058]) , an initiating node that acquired a current channel occupancy time (It is beneficial that initiating device, e.g., either the gNB or UE, indicate that it successfully acquires the channel by transmitting an indicator, which it may be denoted by a CAI, such that other responding devices become aware of which nodes occupied the COT [0150]); determining a transmission pattern that includes one or more idle periods based at least in part on a fixed frame period (FFP) structure associated with the initiating node that acquired the current channel occupancy time (The indication may carry information including but not limited to one or more of the following information: Parameters associated with frame periodicity (FFP), the length of the COT, the length of the idle window [0150][0151]; and wherein the one or more idle periods include at least an idle period associated with the UE ( [0150][0151]); and an idle period that is common to the multiple TRPs. Please note: under Broadest reasonable interpretation, claim is satisfied by one idle period. However Awadin teaches Even other devices from different RATs attempting to occupy the unlicensed channel may transmit the CAI to avoid transmitting while the COT is occupied by other nodes and causing interference; which shows refraining from transmission during the COT including the idle periods [0150], and that typically, transmissions during the idle window of the FFP are prohibited [0081]. Awadin did not explicitly teach refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods. Chien teaches refraining from transmitting during the one or more idle periods (The UE 10 should refrain from UL transmission in the region of: Case 1: an idle period in an FFP of a UE [0115][0116]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Chien to the teachings of Awadin . The motivation for such an addition would be to improve uplink reliability and reduce latency, power consumption, and unnecessary overhead (Chien [0024]) . Regarding claim 2, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above. Please note: under Broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim is satisfied by one idle period, hence it is still rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1. Regarding claim 3, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 2, as outlined above. Awadin further teaches wherein the UE is the initiating node or a responding node sharing the current channel occupancy time with the initiating node (It is beneficial that initiating device, e.g., either the gNB or UE, … [0150]). Regarding claim 11 “method by TRP/gNB”, claim 24 “UE”, and claim 28 “TRP/gNB”, are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “method by UE”, where Awadin teaches that either the UE or the gNB/TRP can be sender or receiver of the Channel Acquisition Indicator (CAI) (Also, this indicator is not limited to associated NR-U nodes (e.g., the gNB/TRP may transmit a CAI to its UEs), the gNB/TRP may transmit the CAI to UEs not under its control either belonging to the same operator or a different one, the gNB/TRP may transmit the CAI to another gNB(s)/TRP(s) either belonging to the same operator or a different one, or the UE may transmit the CAI to the gNB(s)/ TRP(s) associated with this UE [0150]). Regarding claim 12, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 11, as outlined above. Please note: under Broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim is satisfied by one idle period, hence the claim is still rejected under the same reasoning as claim 11. Regarding claim 13, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 12, as outlined above. Awadin further teaches wherein the TRP is the initiating node or a responding node sharing the current channel occupancy time with the initiating node (It is beneficial that initiating device, e.g., either the gNB or UE, … [0150]). Regarding claim 14, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 11, as outlined above. Please note: under Broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim is satisfied by one idle period, hence the claim is still rejected under the same reasoning as claim 11. Regarding claim 15, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 11, as outlined above. Awadin further teaches wherein the one or more idle periods cover a listen-before-talk (LBT) gaps associated with the UE (If the gap between the responding device transmission and the last transmission by the initiating device that issued the grant is less than 16 us, the responding device transmit without performing a CCA 53. If the gap between the responding device transmission and the last transmission by the initiating device that issued the grant is greater than 16 µs, then the responding device has to perform CCA 53 on the operating channel during a single observation slot within a 25 µs period ending, i.e., CAT2 Listen Before Talk (LBT), immediately before the granted transmission time [0057]). Regarding claim 16, Awadin and Chien teach all the features of claim 11, as outlined above. Awadin further teaches wherein the one or more idle periods are determined independent from an idle period associated with the UE (The indication may carry information including but not limited to one or more of the following information: Parameters associated with frame periodicity (FFP), the length of the COT, the length of the idle window [0150][0151] which makes it obvious to have different lengths of idle windows). Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 AYMAN A ABAZA whose telephone number is (571)270-0422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5. 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, Deborah Reynolds, can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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. /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/264,131 Page 2 Art Unit: 2465
Prosecution Insights