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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-30 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. US 18/444,670. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application
US 18/444,670
Claim 1. An apparatus configured for wireless communications, comprising: one or more memories comprising processor-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the processor-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to:
determine a target time for performing a change in activation or deactivation of a current cell discontinuous reception (DRX) operation at a first cell, the target time determined based on a scheduling time offset associated with the first cell, an indication transmission slot, and a preconfigured delay;
send, to one or more user equipments (UEs) served in the indication transmission slot by the first cell, the target time for performing the change in activation or deactivation of the current cell DRX operation at the first cell; and
perform the change in activation or deactivation of the current cell DRX operation at the first cell at the target time.
Claim 1. An apparatus configured for wireless communications, comprising: one or more memories comprising processor-executable instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the processor-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: determine a target time for performing a change in activation or deactivation of a current cell discontinuous reception (DRX) operation at a first cell, the target time determined based on one or more uplink synchronization reference points, an indication transmission slot, and a preconfigured delay; send, to one or more user equipments (UEs) served in the indication transmission slot by the first cell, the target time for performing the change in activation or deactivation of the current cell DRX operation at the first cell; and perform the change in activation or deactivation of the current cell DRX operation at the first cell at the target time.
Note that the table above only compared the conflicting claim 1. However, the Applicant is advised that the other independent and dependent claims in instant application also have their conflicting claims in US 18444670 and thus are rejected on a similar fashion as that in the table above, resulting in a double patenting rejection to all claims in instant application.
Thus, this double patenting rejection is necessary to prevent unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 05/07/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the art rejection have been withdrawn. However, double patenting rejections are remain.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZHIREN QIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5444. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/ZHIREN QIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights