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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending, of which all pending claims are rejected.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a mental process without significantly more. For example, claim 1 recite(s) a structure of encoding used in a communication channel. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application for the following reasons:
The revised patent eligibility guidelines requires a two-prong analysis under step 2A. In prong one, it is determined that the claimed limitations are directed to a mental process that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper". For example: “obtaining a threshold for weights of rows in a polar coding generator matrix…..,; obtaining a smallest index of the information set…; selecting a first candidate index based on a frozen…; selecting a second candidate index based on information indices…; determining that a support of the first candidate index is distinct …; and repeating, based on the determination, …...” - are all steps of a mental process and mathematical calculations.
In prong two, it is determined whether any additional elements rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The additional elements to the abstract method are as follows: ‘obtaining a smallest index and selecting a first and a second candidate index.’ Mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05f). Therefore, these additional elements are not indicative of integration into a practical application.
In step 2B, an evaluation is made as to whether the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the exception itself. As claim 1 recites ‘obtaining a threshold…, obtaining a smallest index…; selecting indexes…; determining that the index is distinct…; and repeating…at least one bit…’ - but after doing all these mathematical steps there is no encoding/decoding or any other steps to transform an abstract idea into a practical application. Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, a practical application is the transformation of an abstract idea—such as a mathematical formula, algorithm, or method of organizing human activity—into a concrete, useful, and technically improved process or product. When an abstract idea is missing this practical application, it is deemed a "judicial exception" and is ineligible for a patent. The analysis is the same as laid out in step 2A above, and therefore, the conclusion is the same: claim 1 is ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. Similarly, independent claims 9 and 17 are also ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 for the same reasons as claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are further directed to a mental process for the following reasons:
Claims 2-3, 10-11, 18-19 are directed to perform various steps of mathematical computations of removing the minimum weight codewords and other low weight codewords (See [0079]).
Claims 4, 12, 20 are directed to perform various steps of mathematical computations of one bit is repeated at the frozen index larger than the smallest index (See [0006]).
Claims 5-6, 13-14 are directed to perform various steps of mathematical computations on the determination, the first and the second candidate indexes are included in a repeating set A and a repeated set A respectively (See [0074, 0077, 0080]).
Claims 7, 15 are directed to perform various steps of mathematical computations of the supports of indexes satisfy a condition (See [0070]).
Claims 8, 16 are directed to perform various steps of mathematical computations where binary form of an index has non-zero values (See Table 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if the pending 35 USC § 101 rejection and all remaining pending objections and rejections (if any) are overcome.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the claims are allowable because in interpreting the claims, in light of the specification, the examiner finds the claimed invention to be patentably distinct from the prior art of record. The prior art made of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of elements, as recited in independent claims 1, 9 and 17.
The prior art of record Li et al. (US 2019/0372605 A1) teaches, an exemplary method may be performed at the encoder. The method generally includes encoding a stream of bits using a polar code. The encoding includes selecting a first set of channel indices for encoding information bits. The encoding includes selecting a second set of the channel indices smaller than a channel index for a first information bit for encoding fixed frozen bits. The encoding includes selecting remaining channel indices for dynamic frozen (PCF) bits having values based on one or more of the information bits. The method includes transmitting the encoded stream of bits.
However, as per claim 1, the prior art of record Li et al. does not teach or suggest either alone or in combination: “obtaining a smallest index of the information set with a weight less than or equal to the threshold; selecting a first candidate index based on a frozen index that is larger than the smallest index; selecting a second candidate index based on information indices that are smaller than a largest candidate frozen index and that corresponds to a weight less than or equal to the threshold; determining that a support of the first candidate index is distinct from a support of the second candidate index in at least two elements; and repeating, based on the determination, at least one bit from the second candidate index to the first candidate index.”
Consequently, claim 1 is allowable over the prior art. The encoding apparatus independent claim 9 and the decoding apparatus independent claim 17 include allowable limitations similar to claim 1, and therefore, are allowable for similar reasons.
The above features together with other limitations of the independent claims are novel and non-obvious over the prior art of record. The dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 are being definite, enabled by the specification, and further limiting to the independent claims, are also allowable.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
When amending the claims, Applicants are respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ENAMUL MD KABIR whose telephone number is (571)270-7256. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00-6:30 pm.
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 on 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 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.
/ENAMUL M KABIR/
Examiner, Art Unit 2112
/ALBERT DECADY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Prosecution Insights