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 Objections
Claims 1-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Words in a claim should not have a bold font. Claims should be in a standard formatting and should not use bold type. Additionally, the spacing in claim 1, line 15 for the word “characterized” should be modified such that the word is on the same line as limitations on line 16. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only (lines 6-7, “the method according to one of the claims 11 to 14”). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/01/2025 and 12/18/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-8 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.
The term “IP” in the pre-amble of claim 1 is an acronym which requires definition on the first instance of the limitation (e.g. internet protocol). Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 1, The limitations of voice packets (110, 120, 210) and digital voice packets (110, 120, 210) are referencing identical components and should be consistently referred to in all instances as either “voice packets” or “digital voice packets”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "during the connection period (30)" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 refers to "time information of a transmitter time ..indicates a time of sending "which interprets the skilled person that this time information refers to the moment in time the packet leaves the source, e.g. entering a MAC/PHY interface. Contrary to this the description discloses (see pg. 39, I. 6-10) that the "sampling instant of the first voice sample" is to be interpreted as "time of sending". Consequently the interpretation of claim 1 alone is not consistent with the disclosure of the description.
Claim 1 (claim page 2, lines 7-8) refers to "...during receipt of subsequent voice packets in each case...". The term "each case" is not clear (Art. 6 PCT). As far as the application is understood the term "each case" refers to each voice packet 110, 120 (RPT packet, R2S packet); see description pg. 42, 1.3-5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowable over the prior art. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not specify from claim 1,
in each case,
the receiver time is compared with the time information, which is contained in the header (H) of the subsequent voice packet (110, 120; 210), at the transmitter time when the voice packet was sent out and a relative packet transmission duration (delta) is determined relative to the receiver time,
a resultant minimum relative packet transmission duration (delta) is temporarily stored, and
the receiver time dependent on the temporarily stored minimum relative packet transmission duration (delta) is adjusted in such a manner that the receiver time correlates with the transmitter time when sending out the voice packet (110, 120; 210) with the minimum relative packet transmission duration,
in that, when receiving a first voice packet (111) with voice content after at least one voice packet (120) without voice content, the receiver determines the actual time of receipt of this voice packet by comparing (deltaJB) the time information in the received voice packet (111) with the receiver time at receipt and determines the buffer (DJB) as a function of the actual time of receipt.
The closest prior art, Falk et al. does not disclose the combination of features of claim 1, specifically "the receiver time dependent on the temporarily stored minimum relative packet transmission duration (delta) is adjusted in such a manner that the receiver time correlates with the transmitter time when sending out the voice packet (110, 120; 210) with the minimum relative packet transmission duration" and a minimum duration in "each case" wherein the packets with voice and without voice are used for the minimum duration.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 110809097
EP 4367813
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIRAPON TULOP whose telephone number is (571)270-7491. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
/JIRAPON TULOP/Examiner, Art Unit 2693