DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This Office Action is a response to communications dated 12/27/2023. Claims 51-65 are pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 12/27/2023, 06/04/2024, 07/23/2024, 03/07/2025, 10/01/2025, and d01/14/2026 comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. They have been considered and placed in the application file.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: As per claim 15, there are discrepancies in the claim as following:
Line 1, numeral “15” should be changed to --65--.
Line 4, “claim 1” should be changed to --claim 51--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 15 is 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.
As per claim 15, the claim is deemed indefinite for the following rationales.
First, it appears there are error in claim numbering and in its dependency because claim 15 and claim 1 have been cancelled per Preliminary Amendment dated 12/27/2023.
Second, the claim appears to be an independent claim drafted in a dependent claim format to depend from cancelled claim 1. Perhaps, in a response to this Office Action the Applicant should correct its dependency as well as rewrite the claim in a proper independent claim format and in its entirety to clearly set forth the structural interconnect of all functional limitations. Because in the present condition, it is unclear what are the metes and bounds of a claim invention that the Applicant seeks to protect.
(Note: For examining purpose, claim 15 shall be treated as claim 65 and it shall also be treated to properly depend from claim 51 hereinbelow)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 65 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it directs to “A computer program product” disclosed as computer/program/instructions/code on page 15, first paragraph of the specification of the instant application. As a result, the claim is rejected as being drawn to a computer program/software per se claim and it does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 51-64 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The following are considered the most relevant prior arts of record against the claim invention and in that they teach as followings.
Pradas et al. (US 2017/0285621) teaches a method (FIGs. 2-4) performed by a communication device (FIG. 2; 202) for modifying a communication behavior (capability configuration of 202) of the communication device (FIG. 2; 202) with regard to communication in a network (FIG. 2; 200&202&204), wherein the communication behavior (capability configuration of 202) is modified by controlling the functionality (range of predefined configurations that can be used in radio communication) of the communication device (FIG. 2; 202) (see Abstract and thereinafter), the method comprising:
providing (sends) at least one programmability capability indicator, PCI, (capability pointer) to a network node (200) (FIG. 2; first action 2:1 and para [0034]: “wireless device 202 sends a capability pointer, or an indication thereof, to the network node 200 over a radio interface”),
obtaining (receive), from the network node (200), configuration instructions (response) provided in response to the providing of the at least one PCI (capability pointer) (para [0034]: "The network node 200 may also receive the capability pointer or indication thereof in response to a capability enquiry transmitted to the wireless device 202, e.g. during network attachment or other occasion."); and
updating (used) the communication behavior (capability configuration of 202) utilizing the obtained configuration instructions (para [0036]: “In a following action 2:2, the network node 200 retrieves the capability configuration of the wireless device 202, based on the capability pointer received from wireless device 202. In this action 2:2, the network node 200 retrieves the capability configuration from a capability database 204 or the like where a range of predefined capability configurations and associated capability pointers are maintained. The capability database 204 may reside at any location, as mentioned above, and the solution is not limited in this respect. For example, database 204 may be implemented locally at the network node 200 or in a more central entity in the radio network or other location that can be accessed by the network node 200. The retrieved capability configuration can then be used in a radio communication between the network node 200 and the wireless device 202, as shown in another action 2:3.” Moreover; para [0046]: "The capability configuration retrieved by the network node in the procedure of FIG. 3 may include any type of information that is somehow related to how, and in which circumstances, the wireless device is capable of operating during radio communication ... the network node may decide if it is suitable to activate a certain function or feature or not, given a current network condition.").
Nevertheless; Pradas et al. appears to fail to fairly show or render obvious a claim invention comprising, in addition to the above discussed features and among other limitations, novel and unobvious limitations of “wherein the at least one PCI comprises an indication of one or more supported application programming interfaces, APIs,” structurally and functionally interconnected in a manner as claimed.
Wu et al. (US 2022/0303991) teaches a method performed by a communication device for modifying a communication behavior of the communication device with regard to communication in a network, wherein the communication behavior is modified by controlling the functionality of the communication device (Abstract and thereinafter: “A method, a computer-readable medium, and an apparatus are provided. The apparatus may be a UE. The UE receives, from a base station, one or more BWP configurations for configuring a plurality of BWPs at the UE. The respective one or more BWP parameters of a set of BWP parameters define each respective BWP of the plurality of BWPs. The UE sends a capability indication indicating that the UE is capable of resetting values of one or more parameters of the set of BWP parameters. The UE sends a subset indication indicating that the UE is capable of resetting values of one or more parameters of a subset of BWP parameters from the set of BWP parameters.”), the method comprising:
providing (send) at least one programmability capability indicator, PCI, (BWP capability indication 172) to a network node (base station 702) (para [0057]: "The UE 704 initially may send a BWP capability indication 712 to the base station 702 through one or more messages." Moreover; para [0058]: "the BWP capability indication 712 sent from the UE 704 to the base station 702 may contain a single bit indicating that the UE 704 supports BWP switching (or not in other examples) with a default set of BWP parameters 830 that are predefined. Accordingly, based on the BWP capability indication 712, the base station 702 can determine that the UE 704 supports changing values of some or all of the BWP parameters 830 in order to switch from one BWP to another BWP.") ;
obtaining, from the network node (base station 702), configuration instructions (BWP configurations 714) provided in response to the providing of the at least one PCI (para [0060]: "The base station 702 may send BWP configurations 714 through one or more configuration messages (e.g., an RRC message) to the UE 704."); and
updating the communication behavior (switching between BWPs) utilizing the obtained configuration instructions (BWP configurations 714) (examples of the UE is being configured using the BWP configurations 714 received from the base stations 702 are discussed in paras [0060] to [0064]. And the discussion is corresponding to the claim limitations. Specifically, para [0064]: "In this example, the BWP 810-1 is configured for the UE 704 to use when the UE 704 is in a power saving mode. The BWP 810-2 is configured for the UE 704 when the UE 704 is in a normal operation mode. When the UE 704 switches between the BWP 810-1 and the BWP 810-2, the values of the BWP parameters 824-1/BWP parameters 824-2 do not change, while the values of the BWP parameters 822-1/BWP parameters 822-2 change.").
Nevertheless; Wu et al. appears to fail to fairly show or render obvious a claim invention comprising, in addition to the above discussed features and among other limitations, novel and unobvious limitations of “wherein the at least one PCI comprises an indication of one or more supported application programming interfaces, APIs,” structurally and functionally interconnected in a manner as claimed.
Additional references listed hereinbelow are also considered in the determination of the allowability of the claims. Nevertheless; they too appear to fail to fairly show or render obvious a claim invention comprising, in addition to the above discussed features and among other limitations, novel and unobvious limitations of “wherein the at least one PCI comprises an indication of one or more supported application programming interfaces, APIs,” structurally and functionally interconnected in a manner as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pradas et al. (US 2017/0285621).
Wu et al. (US 2022/0303991).
Li et al. (US 12,207,218).
Palanisamy et al. (US 2016/0100362).
Keller et al. (US 9,338,641).
Siomna et al. (US 2012/0040687).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK DUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3164. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00AM-3:30PM.
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, MICHAEL THIER can be reached at 571-272-2832. 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.
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
/FRANK DUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474 January 21, 2026