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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed January 7, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5-12, 15-17, and 20-22 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Rejection of claims 1, 5, 6, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been withdrawn
Applicant’s arguments filed on January 7, 2026 with respect to rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pp. 15-17 of Applicant’s response, Applicant argues that the cited references fail to teach or suggest “sending the DBTW length, wherein sending the DBTW length comprises: sending physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length” and “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” of claim 1. In particular, Applicant argues that the cited references fail to teach or suggest the foregoing limitations because “Huawei is silent as to using those bits [the disclosed borrowed bits] to directly indicate DBTW length” and further contends that Huawei discloses a “comparison-based mechanism [which] is inconsistent with the one-to-one correspondence required by” the limitation: “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” of claim 1. (pp. 16 and 17 of Applicant’s response).
Nothing in the claims require that the DBTW lengths are explicitly indicated by the physical broadcast channel (PBCH) indication information. Thus, the claims do not require the PBCH indication information to “directly indicate DBTW length” as Applicant contends on p. 16 of Applicant’s response. Even an implicit indication of the DBTW length can teach the corresponding limitations as recited. Huawei clearly discloses physical broadcast channel (PBCH) indication information indicating DBTW length. In particular Huawei teaches “we propose to use 3 bits to indicate candidate values of N_SSB^QCL={64,52,40,32,28,16,8}. The corresponding supported DBTW lengths will then be {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms.” (Huawei, p. 13, lines 13-15). Therefore, Huawei does disclose that an SSB has a corresponding DBTW length. Thus, a configured UE will determine the corresponding DBTW length in response to an indicated SSB. Furthermore, Huawei discloses that of the proposed 3 borrowed bits “[o]ne bit from subCarrierSpacingCommon in MIB, One bit from ssb-SubcarrierOffset in MIB, and one bit from searchSpaceZero in pdcch-ConfigSIB1 in MIB.” (Huawei, p. 13, lines 36-37 and lines 16-21). Since the MIB is part of the PBCH Huawei is disclosing that the PBCH indication information indicates the DBTW length. Accordingly, Huawei teaches the limitation “sending the DBTW length, wherein sending the DBTW length comprises: sending physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length” of claim 1.
Furthermore, as discussed above, Huawei teaches that “values of N_SSB^QCL={64,52,40,32,28,16,8}” and “[t]he corresponding supported DBTW lengths will then be {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms.” (Huawei, p. 13, lines 13-15). In other words, Huawei is teaching a different SSB for a different DBTW length. Therefore, Huawei discloses the claim limitation “different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” of claim 1.
Accordingly, the cited references teach the limitations of claim 1 and similarly teach the limitations of claims 7 and 22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5-12, 15-17, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vivo (R1-2102514; “Discussion on initial access for NR operation from 52.6 GHz to 71GHz,” 3GPP TSH RAN WG1 #104b-2; published April 20, 2021) in view of Huawei (R1-2102327; “Initial access signals and channels for 52-71GHz spectrum,” 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #104bis-e; published April 7, 2021).
Regarding claim 1, Vivo teaches “[a] method for determining a discovery burst transmission window (DBTW), performed by a network device and comprising: determining a working frequency band in an initial access process of a terminal, and determining . . . used by the terminal to receive in the working frequency band a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process” (see p. 6, lines 45 – 48, and p. 7, lines 1 – 23, section 2.3; UE (i.e., terminal), during the initial access, determines whether DBTW is enabled according to the frequency band information (i.e., working frequency band) of the SSB (i.e., a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block). Thus, the terminal determines the working frequency band and can receive in the working frequency band. Additionally, an SSB is received from a network device during the initial access process of the terminal, and since the SSB is configured by a network device, the network device has determined the working frequency band in an initial access process of a terminal; thus, the network device determines a working frequency band in an initial access process of a terminal, and determines and transmits a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process in the working frequency band).
Vivo does not explicitly state “determining a DBTW length used by the terminal” and “sending the DBTW length, wherein sending the DBTW length comprises: sending physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” of claim 1. However, the foregoing limitations are well known in the art prior to the effecting filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, Huawei teaches “determining a DBTW length used by the terminal” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms can be indicated to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements. Thus, the network device determines a DBTW length used by the terminal).
Huawei further teaches “sending the DBTW length, wherein sending the DBTW length comprises: sending physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms can be indicated (i.e., send) to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements in MIB (i.e., via the physical broadcast channel indication information); since the MIB is part of the PBCH Huawei is disclosing that the PBCH indication information indicates the DBTW length; thus, the network device sends the DBTW length, wherein sending the DBTW length comprises: sending physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length);
Huawei further discloses “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” (see p. 13, lines 12 – 20 of Huawei; ;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
(i.e., different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks) and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms (i.e., plurality of DBTW lengths, where the plurality of DBTW lengths correspond to different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks); in other words, Huawei is teaching a different number of candidate SS/PBCH blocks for different DBTW lengths; and it can be indicated to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements (i.e., the physical broadcast channel indication information)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to determine a DBTW length used by a terminal and send PBCH indication information indicating the DBTW length and a plurality of DBTW lengths that are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 1 and further teaches “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate two DBTW lengths, and the two DBTW lengths are carried in one bit in sub- carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20 of Huawei;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms are indicated to the UE. The least significant bit (LSB) (i.e., one bit) of ssb-SubcarrierOffset (i.e., sub- carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel) can indicate two DBTW lengths. For example, a high bit value (e.g., a “1”) of the LSB can correspond to DBTW of 5ms and a low bit value (e.g., “0”) of the LSB can correspond to a different DBTW length, such as 2.5ms. Thus, the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate two DBTW lengths, and the two DBTW lengths are carried in one bit in sub- carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 1 and further teaches “wherein the working frequency band comprises a licensed spectrum, a shared spectrum, or a multiplexed frequency band of the licensed spectrum and the shared spectrum” (see p. 7, line 8 of Vivo; frequency band (i.e., the working frequency band) can be licensed spectrum and/or unlicensed spectrum).
Regarding claim 7, Vivo teaches “[a] method for determining a discovery burst transmission window (DBTW), performed by a terminal and comprising: determining a working frequency band according to an initial search procedure” (see p. 6, lines 45 – 47, and p. 7, lines 1 – 6, section 2.3; UE (i.e., terminal), during the initial access, determines whether DBTW is enabled according to the frequency band information (i.e., working frequency band) of the SSB (i.e., a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block). Therefore, the terminal determines the working frequency band and can transmit in the working frequency band. Thus, the terminal determines a working frequency band according to an initial search procedure);
Vivo further teaches “. . . the terminal to receive a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in an initial access process based on the working frequency band” (see p. 6, lines 45 – 47, and p. 7, lines 1 – 6; UE (the terminal) during the initial access, determines whether DBTW is enabled according to the frequency band information (i.e., working frequency band) of the SSB (i.e., a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block); thus, the terminal receives a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in an initial access process based on the working frequency band).
Vivo does not explicitly disclose “determining a DBTW length used by the terminal” and “receiving physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive in the working frequency band the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” of claim 1. However, the foregoing limitations are well known in the art prior to the effecting filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, Huawei teaches “determining a DBTW length used by the terminal” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms can be indicated to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements. Thus, the terminal determines a DBTW length).
Huawei further teaches “receiving physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive in the working frequency band the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms can be indicated (i.e., send) to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements in MIB (i.e., via the physical broadcast channel indication information); since the MIB is part of the PBCH Huawei is disclosing that the PBCH indication information indicates the DBTW length; thus, the terminal receives physical broadcast channel indication information, wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive in the working frequency band the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process),
Huawei also teaches “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate a plurality of DBTW lengths, and different DBTW lengths of the plurality of DBTW lengths are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks” (see p. 13, lines 12 – 20 of Huawei; ;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
(i.e., different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks) and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms (i.e., plurality of DBTW lengths, where the plurality of DBTW lengths correspond to different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks); in other words, Huawei is teaching a different number of candidate SS/PBCH blocks for different DBTW lengths; and it can be indicated to the UE (i.e., the terminal) by the network device via bits borrowed from subCarrierSpacingCommon and the LSB of ssb-SubcarrierOffset and searchSpaceZero elements (i.e., the physical broadcast channel indication information)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to determine a DBTW length used to receive a synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in an initial access process and receive PBCH indication information indicating the DBTW length and a plurality of DBTW lengths that are correspondingly configured with different numbers of candidate synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel blocks. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 7 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block is performed in the initial access process based on the working frequency band comprises: determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and the physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block identifier parsed in the initial access process in response to determining that the working frequency band is a shared spectrum and sub-carrier spacing is less than a sub-carrier spacing threshold” (see p. 13, lines p. 14, lines 8-18 of Huawei; frequency band in 52.6GHz to 71GHz spectrum (i.e., shared spectrum), where the sub-carrier spacing (SCS) is 120Khz, which is less than the max SCS (e.g., 960KHz) (i.e., less than threshold); thus, sub-carrier spacing is than a threshold and the terminal determines the DBTW length). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to determine a DBTW length when a sub-carrier spacing is less than a threshold. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 8 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the synchronization signal and the physical broadcast channel block identifier parsed in the initial access process comprises: determining that no DBTW is used by the terminal to receive in the transmission of the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process in response to determining that the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block identifier parsed in the initial access process is greater than an identifier threshold” (see p. 12, lines 37 and 38 of Huawei; if
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
= 32 (i.e., physical broadcast channel block identifier) and DBTW length is configured as 4, 8, 16, 20 slots (i.e., the physical broadcast channel block identifier is greater than threshold identifier (e.g., SSB identifier = 28) for corresponding to the configured DBTW length of 20), it is implicitly indicated that DBTW is disabled (i.e., determining that no DBTW is used in the transmission of the synchronization signal and the physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to determine that no DBTW is used when the physical broadcast channel block identifier is greater than a threshold. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 8 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block identifier parsed in the initial access process comprises: determining that the DBTW is used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process in response to determining that the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block identifier parsed in the initial access process is less than or equal to an identifier threshold” (see p. 12, lines 37 and 38 of Huawei; if
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
= 32 (i.e., physical broadcast channel block identifier) and if DBTW is configured as 24, 32, 40 (i.e., the physical broadcast channel block identifier is less than or equal to threshold identifier (e.g., SSB identifier = 28) for corresponding to the configured DBTW length of 20 , it is implicitly indicated that DBTW is enabled (i.e., determining that the DBTW is used in the transmission of the synchronization signal and the physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to determine that DBTW is used when the physical broadcast channel block identifier is less than or equal to a threshold. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 10 and further teaches “wherein the DBTW length is a default DBTW length” (see p. 11, line 44 of Huawei; duration of DBTW (i.e., DBTW length) is no greater than 5ms (i.e., a default DBTW length); thus, the DBTW length is a default DBTW length). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Vivo to incorporate the teachings of Huawei to have a default DBTW length. The suggestion to do so would have been to indicate enabling and/or disabling DBTW for UEs (p. 13, lines 5 and 6).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 8 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length used in transmission of the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the working frequency band comprises: determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the physical broadcast channel indication information in response to determining that the working frequency band is a shared spectrum and sub-carrier spacing is greater than a sub-carrier spacing threshold” (see p. 8, lines 11-29 of Vivo; sub-carrier spacing (SCS) of 960K and 480K (i.e., SCS greater than a threshold SCS) is supported for DBTW and the working frequency band is a shared spectrum (e.g., between 52.6 GHz to 71 GHz)).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 12 and further teaches “wherein the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate two DBTW lengths, and the two DBTW lengths are carried in one bit in sub-carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel” (see p. 13, lines 14 – 20 of Huawei;
N
S
S
B
Q
C
L
=
64
,
52
,
40
,
32
,
28
,
16
,
8
and their corresponding supported DBTW lengths of {40, 32, 24, 20, 16, 8, 4} slots, or, equivalently, {5, 4, 3, 2.5, 2, 1, 0.5} ms are indicated to the UE. The least significant bit (LSB) (i.e., one bit) of ssb-SubcarrierOffset (i.e., sub- carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel) can indicate two DBTW lengths. For example, a high bit value (e.g., a “1”) of the LSB can correspond to DBTW of 5ms and a low bit value (e.g., “0”) of the LSB can correspond to a different DBTW length, such as 2.5ms. Thus, the physical broadcast channel indication information is configured to indicate two DBTW lengths, and the two DBTW lengths are carried in one bit in sub- carrier indication information of a physical broadcast channel).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 7 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the working frequency band comprises: determining that no DBTW is used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process in response to determining that the working frequency band is a licensed spectrum” (see p. 7, lines 3 and 4 of Vivo; UE judges whether there is DBTW according to the frequency band information (the working frequency band), where no DBTW if operation in licensed band).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Vivo and Huawei teaches the method of claim 7 and further teaches “wherein the determining the DBTW length used in transmission of the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on the working frequency band comprises: determining the DBTW length used by the terminal to receive the synchronization signal and physical broadcast channel block in the initial access process based on physical broadcast channel indication information in response to determining that the working frequency band is a multiplexed frequency band of a licensed spectrum and a shared spectrum” (see p. 7, line 8 of Vivo; the frequency band (the working frequency band) can be in a licensed band and/or an unlicensed band (shared spectrum); thus the working frequency band can be multiplexed frequency band of a licensed spectrum and a shared spectrum).
Regarding claim 20, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to claim 1, that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 1. Claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 21, it is a CRM claim corresponding to claim 7, that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 7. Claim 21 is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 22, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to claim 7, that has been rejected above. Applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 7. Claim 22 is rejected under the same rationale.
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 SRIHARSHA REDDY VANGAPATY whose telephone number is (571)272-7655. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/SRIHARSHA REDDY VANGAPATY/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights