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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-20 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.
Referring to claim 1, line 4 recites, “determining a length K1 of a first sequence based on K or M…” It is not clear how a “first sequence” can be based on a “K” or “M”. Both K and M are positive integers. How is a first sequence based on a number? It’s also not clear what constitutes a “first sequence”. It is never recited again in the claim. Presumably it also a number of information bits, however, that is not clear as claimed.
Referring to claim 1, it is not clear as to what “J coding sub-blocks” are. There is no context to understand what constitutes a “sub-block”.
Referring to claim 2, the claim recites “obtaining the first vector based on K, K1, and the predefined sequence”. It’s not clear how a first vector is obtained based on a number?
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the following manner" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the following formula" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the following manner" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the following formula" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Referring to claim 11, the claim continues the same issues as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the following manner" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the following formula" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the following manner" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the following formula" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Due to the vagueness and a lack of clear definiteness in the articles used in the claims, the claims have been treated on their merits as best understood by the examiner. The prior art cited in the attached PTO-892 is a list of references that appear to be of interest.
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 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed "memory" can be interpreted to include both transitory and non-transitory embodiments as described in paragraph [00181] of the specification. Transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
A claim drawn to such a memory that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin Knapp whose telephone number is (571)270-3008. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm (ET).
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, Albert Decady can be reached at (571) 272-3819. 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.
Justin R. Knapp
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2112
/JUSTIN R KNAPP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112