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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to the Applicant’s communication field on 03/04/2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1 - 11 are pending in this office action. Notes that Examiner requested for e-Terminal Disclaimer in order to process to allowance, however, the Attorney denied to find Terminal Disclaimer and requested to issue an office action (see details in the Interview summary). Thus, the Double Patenting is presented as below.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (PTO-1449) filed on 03/04/2024, 05/08/2024, 07/10/2024, 09/11/2024, and 07/08/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosed therein was considered by the Examiner.
Double Patenting
3. 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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
4. Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, and 6 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 14 of U.S. Patent No.11,483,770.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because omission of element and its function (i.e., different wordy in different orders are found on the claims) in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before.
5. Claims 1 and 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No.11,950,187.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 5 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 6 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,950,187.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because omission of element and its function (i.e., an integrated circuit) in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before.
Reasons for Allowance
6. In view of updated search, claims 1 - 11 are allowable over the prior art of record if overcome the Double Patenting rejection above.
7. The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
2019/0090299 (Ang et al.) is the closest prior art to the application invention, which discloses a user equipment monitors, in a first bandwidth part, of a plurality of bandwidth parts, associated with a first monitoring periodicity and in a downlink control channel (e.g., PDCCH), for a downlink control information (DCI) message, the user equipment selectively transitions, based at least in part on the DCI message, from the first bandwidth part to a second bandwidth part, of the plurality of bandwidth parts, associated with a second monitoring periodicity that is less than the first monitoring periodicity; and the UE may enable a discontinuous reception (DRX) mode to enable the UE to periodically transfer, i.e., from a first mode (e.g., a high-power mode) to a second mode (e.g., a low-power mode) to reduce a utilization of power resources, thereby enhancing UE battery life, and to transfer from the second mode to the first mode to improve data traffic communication capability and reduce latency.
2020/0367253 (Kim et al.) discloses a UE that monitors a control channel of a wireless communication system includes: a transceiver; and a controller configured to be connected to the transceiver and configured to control the transceiver to receive PDCCH configuration information indicating a first configuration from an eNB, to monitor a PDCCH according to the first configuration on the basis of the PDCCH configuration information, to receive a configuration switching indicator indicating a second configuration from the eNB, and to monitor the PDCCH according to the second configuration on the basis of the configuration switching indicator, wherein the configuration switching indicator includes at least one of a control channel monitoring period, search space configuration information, and bandwidth configuration information to monitor the PDCCH, and the configuration switching indicator is transmitted using one of a MAC CE or downlink control information.
2022/0210866 (He et al.) discloses a method for a user equipment (UE) apparatus to reduce power consumption in response to an outcome of a signal reception, the outcome can indicate whether or not the UE needs to be active at a next discontinuous reception (DRX) cycle, the signal can also provide configurations of parameters for transmissions or receptions during the next DRX cycle and be used by the UE for measurements and to obtain channel state information. When a UE is configured bandwidth adaptation, the UE monitors PDCCH only on an active DL BWP (bandwidth part), a BWP inactivity timer is used to switch the active BWP to the default BWP, the UE restarts the BWP inactivity timer upon a successful PDCCH decoding.
However, the prior art of record fails to disclose singly or in combination to render obvious that the user equipment is referred to as being in a first mode out of a defined time period and as being in a second mode within the defined time period, and the control circuitry, upon setting the user equipment from the first mode to the second mode: determines resource candidates to be monitored on the PDCCH for receiving scheduling information based on an indication included in the monitored first control signal and/or the identification of the user equipment; controls the transceiver circuitry to receive the second control signal in the resource candidates; based on the received second control signal in the resource candidates, determines data resources for downlink or uplink data transmission; and controls the transceiver circuitry to receive or transmit data on the determined data resources, as defined in the Specification in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by Applicant(s). Therefore, the claims are allowed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONG-THUY THI TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM - 6PM (IFP).
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, ANTHONY ADDY can be reached at (571)272-7795. 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.
/MONG-THUY T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645