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 .
Response to Amendment
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s reply, filed on 12/16/2025, to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 07/16/2025.
Claims 1, 5, and 9 are amended. Claims 1, 5, and 9 are pending and addressed below.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5 and 9 are objected to because limitations under i), ii) and iv) will be better understood if “based on …” clause is given at the beginning of the sentence instead of at the end. For example, limitation i) in line 17-19 should be written as “i) based on that the operation mode of the non-anchor carrier is determined by a first bit of the two bits as the guard band mode, the location of the non-anchor carrier is determined as a predefined location, ”.
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, 5 and 9 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.
Claim 1 recites expression in line 17 under i) “a predefined location” invoke antecedent issue because line 9 already recites “a predefined location”. It is not clear if it is the same or different predefined location.
Claim 1 recites expression in line 18 under i) “the operation mode of the non-anchor carrier” invoke antecedent issue because this expression is not recited in the earlier part of the claim.
Claim 1 recites expression in line 23 under iii) “an operation mode of the non-anchor carrier” invoke antecedent issue because the claim already recites earlier “an operation mode of the non-anchor carrier”. It is not clear if it is the same or different operation mode of the non-anchor carrier.
Claim 1 expression in line 37 “the guard band mode” lacks clarity as the claim recites two guard band modes, a guard band mode for anchor carrier in line 12-13 and a guard band mode for non-anchor carrier in line 18-19.
Claim 1 limitation “ii) the location of the non-anchor carrier is determined by a second bit of the two bits as a location based on a Physical Resource Block, PRB, within an LTE system bandwidth, based on that the operation mode of the non-anchor carrier is determined as the in-band mode”, and limitation “iv) whether the non-anchor carrier is related to in-band different PCI mode or in-band same PCI mode is determined by the second bit, based on that the operation mode of the non- anchor carrier is determined as the in-band mode” are not understood. It is not clear about the same second bit representing, under the same in-band operation mode of the non- anchor carrier, two different states, 1) the location of the non-anchor carrier based on PRB, as recited in the first limitation, and 2) whether non-anchor carrier is related to in-band different PCI mode or in-band same PCI mode, as recited in the second limitation. Moreover, Spec. [568]-[592], as recited in Applicant’s Remark for the support of the amendment, does not clearly disclose the first limitation.
Same rejections above also apply to claims 5 and 9.
Examiners Note
Because of indefiniteness in the claims as explained above, new prior art search will not be proper.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 5 and 9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Su, U.S. Publication No. 20200163032 - METHOD AND USER EQUIPMENT FOR ACCESS TO NARROWBAND INTERNET OF THINGS (NB IOT).
Han, US 20200396722 A1 - DOWNLINK TRANSMISSION IN TDD SUPPPORTING FeNB-IoTs.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-0232. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 9AM-5PM EST; Friday variable.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAHBUBUL BAR CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472