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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 4, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16-21, 25, 26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 15th, 2026 and an interview on June 15th, 2026.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of implied phrases. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, the “or” language, the condition would also not occur and the step or function claimed would never be realized, hence the claim does not require to perform the step or function. See Ex parte Katz, 2011 WL 514314, at 4-5 (BPAI Jan. 27, 2011, 2011 WL 1211248 at 2 (BPAI Mar. 25, 2011); see also In re Johnston, 435 f.3d 1381, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2006)( "optional elements do not narrow the claim because they can always be omitted”). “Or” conditions are not limitations against which prior art must be found. Under the broadest scenario, the steps or functions dependent on the “or” condition would not be invoked, and such, the Examiner is not required to find these limitations in the prior art in order to render the claim anticipated. In re Am. Acad. Of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 f.3d 1359, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
The subject matter of a properly construed claim is defined by the terms that limit the scope of the claim when given their broadest reasonable interpretation. It is this subject matter that must be examined. As a general matter, grammar and the plain meaning of terms as understood by one having ordinary skill in the art used in a claim will dictate whether, and to what extent, the language limits the claim scope. See MPEP § 2111.01 for more information on the plain meaning of claim language. Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. The following types of claim language may raise a question as to its limiting effect:
(A) statements of intended use or field of use, including statements of purpose or intended use in the preamble,
(B) "adapted to" or "adapted for" clauses,
(C) "wherein" or "whereby" clauses,
(D) contingent limitations,
(E) printed matter, or
(F) terms with associated functional language.
This list of examples is not intended to be exhaustive. The determination of whether particular language is a limitation in a claim depends on the specific facts of the case. See, e.g., Griffin v. Bertina, 285 F.3d 1029, 1034, 62 USPQ2d 1431 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
“Where the printed matter is not functionally related to the substrate, the printed matter will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.” In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (footnote omitted). Claim limitations directed to the content of information are not entitled to patentable weight unless that information has a "functional relationship" to its substrate. As a general proposition, the Examiner need not give patentable weight to non-functional descriptive material absent a new and nonobvious functional relationship between the descriptive material and the substrate. See In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2004); see also King Pharm., Inc. v. Eon Labs, Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010); and Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 2111.05 (9th ed. Rev. 08.2017, Jan. 2018). In Ex parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883, 1888 (BPAI 2008) (precedential), the Board held that the nature of the information being manipulated by the computer should not be given patentable weight absent evidence that the information is functionally related to the process “by changing the efficiency or accuracy or any other characteristic” of the steps. See also Ex parte Curry, 84 USPQ2d 1272, 1274 (BPAI 2005) (non-precedential) (holding “wellness-related” data stored in a database and communicated over a network was non-functional descriptive material as claimed because the data “does not functionally change” the system).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6, 7, 12, 27, 28, 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without reception and transmission components (figures 14 and 15) , which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). By definition, a processor can only process data, it cannot receive or transmit any radio signal. According to the specification this is done by the reception and transmission components. The Examiner suggests to amend these claims like Applicant did to the independent claims.
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 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11,12, 15, 27, 28, and 29 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.
Claims 2, 7, 11, 28, are very confusing since they all contradict the independent claims. The independent claims state either they transmit or receives an uplink or downlink transmissions. Then these dependent claims state either they do not or refrain from transmitting or receiving an uplink or downlink transmission. So are the claims are transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmission and at the same time not transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmission, which is impossible. Because these claims are so confusing, really do not make any sense whatsoever and impossible, no art can be applied at this time.
Claims 5, 6, 8, 12, 27, 29 are confusing. All the independent claims state either transmitting or receiving an uplink or downlink transmission. These dependent claims also claiming either transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmissions. It is unclear if the dependent claims transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmissions are the same, different or second transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmissions. For compact prosecution only, the Examiner shall take these claims to mean a different or second transmitting or receiving the uplink or downlink transmissions.
The term “higher layer” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “higher layer” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Also, if the apparatus receives the highest layer, how can the apparatus do this function? What makes a layer higher or lower?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 8, and 22, as understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WO 2024/169310.
The claims are confusing and poorly written, especially the dependent claims. For compact prosecution, the Examiner will try apply art to these perplexing claims.
WO 2024/169310 discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising one or more memories(“In a possible design, the chip system further includes a memory, and the memory is used to store necessary program instructions and data. The chip system can be composed of a chip, or can include a chip and other discrete devices” in Summary of Invention) and one or more processors (“In the first aspect, the present application provides a communication method, which can be executed by a terminal device or by a component of the terminal device (such as a processor, a chip, or a chip system, etc.), and the present application does not make specific limitations on this. The method may specifically include: the terminal device receives a first cell-level parameter information, and a second cell-level parameter information or a second terminal-level parameter information from a network device; wherein, the flexible symbol in the time slot indicated by the first cell-level parameter information is either configured with the target uplink subband indicated by the second cell-level parameter information or the second terminal-level parameter information, or is configured with the target downlink subband indicated by the second cell-level parameter information or the second terminal-level parameter information; the terminal device transmits with the network device based on the first cell-level parameter information, and the second cell-level parameter information or the second terminal-level parameter information” in Summary of Invention) coupled to the one or more memories, configured to cause the UE to receive a configuration, from a network, associated with a downlink transmission in one or more subband full duplex (SBFD) symbols (“In a fourth aspect, the present application provides a communication method, which can be executed by a terminal device or by a component of the terminal device (such as a processor, a chip, or a chip system, etc.), and the present application does not make specific limitations on this. The method may specifically include: the terminal device receives a first cell-level parameter information and a first terminal-level parameter information, as well as a second cell-level parameter information from a network device; wherein the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol indicated by the first terminal-level parameter information includes an uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol obtained by the flexible symbol configuration indicated by the first parameter information of the cell; and the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol obtained by the flexible symbol configuration indicated by the first parameter information of the cell is configured with a target uplink subband or target downlink subband indicated by the second parameter information of the cell; the terminal device transmits with the network device based on the first terminal-level parameter information and the second cell-level parameter information.
“In the fourth aspect, the terminal device receives the first parameter information at the cell level and the first parameter information at the terminal level, as well as the second parameter information at the cell level; because the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol indicated by the first parameter information at the terminal level includes the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol obtained by the flexible symbol configuration indicated by the first parameter information of the cell; and the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol obtained by the flexible symbol configuration indicated by the first parameter information of the cell is configured with the target uplink subband or target downlink subband indicated by the second parameter information at the cell level. It can be seen that the network device side configures the flexible symbol where the target uplink subband or target downlink subband indicated by the second parameter information at the cell level is located to the uplink symbol, or downlink symbol, or flexible symbol indicated by the first parameter information at the terminal level. Therefore, the terminal device transmits with the network device based on the first parameter information at the terminal level and the second parameter information at the cell level, which can effectively increase its uplink transmission resources or downlink transmission resources.
“In a fifth aspect, the present application provides a communication method, which can be executed by a terminal device or by a component of the terminal device (such as a processor, a chip, or a chip system, etc.), and the present application does not make specific limitations on this. The method may specifically include: the terminal device receives the first parameter information of the cell level and the first parameter information of the terminal level, as well as the second parameter information of the cell level from the network device; wherein the flexible symbol indicated by the first parameter information of the terminal level includes the first flexible symbol indicated by the first parameter information of the cell level, and the first flexible symbol is configured with the target uplink subband or target downlink subband indicated by the second parameter information of the cell level, and the uplink symbol or downlink symbol indicated by the first parameter information of the terminal level does not include the uplink symbol or downlink symbol obtained by the configuration of the first flexible symbol; the terminal device transmits with the network device based on the first parameter information of the terminal level and the second parameter information of the cell level.” in Summary of Invention) and selectively transmit an uplink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols based at least in part on the configuration (“In order to solve the delay problem of TDD, a flexible duplex is currently proposed, which can be called complementary TDD (C-TDD), full duplex (Full duplex), or other names, such as subband full duplex (SBFD). The main implementation method of SBFD is: in a certain symbol or time slot of the TDD system, uplink and downlink transmission resources can be configured at the same time. As shown in (3) in Figure 2, in a time slot with a sequence number of 0 (slot 0), there is a frequency domain resource in the downlink BWP, and uplink transmission can be performed on this frequency domain resource. In this way, uplink transmission can be performed on slot 0, thereby reducing the delay of uplink transmission. This frequency domain resource is usually called an uplink subband. At this time, downlink transmission can also be performed on slot 0. Then the base station can perform uplink and downlink transmissions simultaneously on slot 0. The UE can also perform uplink and downlink transmissions simultaneously in slot 0 (i.e., full-duplex UE). At the same time, the UE can also perform only uplink transmission or downlink transmission (half-duplex UE). Therefore, compared with TDD, the use of SBFD can increase uplink resources and improve uplink coverage.” In 2. Duplex Mode and;
In SBFD Configuration, “For SBFD configuration, the current solutions include the following:
(1) The downlink symbols configured by TDD-UL-DL-ConfigCommon can be configured as SBFD symbols, that is, UL subbands are configured on these SBFD symbols, and transmission is performed including:
Uplink transmission is allowed within the UL subband of these symbols; uplink transmission is not allowed outside the UL subband of these symbols; downlink transmission is allowed on the DL subband of these symbols (DL subband: the part of the UL subband removed from the DL BWP, or the UL subband and guardband removed from the DL BWP).”
Also, in Configuration rule 1, “When configuring UE-level TDD parameters, the cell-level flexible symbols configured with the first UL subband or the second DL subband in the cell-level SBFD parameters can be configured as: UE-level UL only symbols, or UE-level DL only symbols, or UE-level flexible symbols.
“When the cell-level flexible symbol where the first UL subband or the second DL subband is located is configured as a UE-level UL only symbol or a UE-level DL only symbol in the cell-level SBFD parameters, the first UL subband or the second DL subband is invalid, that is, the symbol becomes a full uplink symbol or a full downlink symbol, and no subband is required. When the cell-level flexible symbol where the first UL subband or the second DL subband is located is configured as a UE-level flexible symbol in the cell-level SBFD parameters, the first UL subband or the second DL subband is valid.”)
Regarding claim 3, note under SBFD Configuration, “For SBFD configuration, the current solutions include the following:
The downlink symbols configured by TDD-UL-DL-ConfigCommon can be configured as SBFD symbols, that is, UL subbands are configured on these SBFD symbols, and transmission is performed including:
Uplink transmission is allowed within the UL subband of these symbols; uplink transmission is not allowed outside the UL subband of these symbols; downlink transmission is allowed on the DL subband of these symbols (DL subband: the part of the UL subband removed from the DL BWP, or the UL subband and guardband removed from the DL BWP).”
Regarding claim 6, note in 1. Data Scheduling in NR, “In the NR system, the physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) carries downlink control information (DCI). The DCI carried by the PDCCH that schedules the physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)/physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) contains two fields: frequency domain resource assignment and time domain resource assignment. The terminal (UE) determines a time-frequency resource block based on the information in these two fields, and PDSCH/PUSCH will be transmitted in this resource block.
“According to different uses and contents, DCI is divided into many formats and scrambled by different radio network temporary identifiers (RNTI), such as random access-radio network temporary identifier (RA-RNTI), paging identifier (P-RNTI), etc. The PDCCH information of different users is distinguished by their corresponding C-RNTI information, that is, the cyclic redundancy check (CRC) of DCI is masked by C-RNTI. The base station configures the UE with a set of candidate PDCCHs that need to monitor DCI through high-level signaling (such as RRC signaling). Since the UE does not know in advance which candidate PDCCH (PDCCH candidate) the base station will receive DCI on, but the UE knows what downlink control information DCI it currently expects to receive based on the base station configuration information, the UE must attempt to decode each candidate PDCCH in this set based on the configuration information, that is, the UE uses the corresponding RNTI to perform a CRC check on the information on the PDCCH candidate. If the CRC check succeeds, the UE knows that the DCI has been successfully obtained. Therefore, this set is the search space set, and the behavior of the UE attempting to decode each candidate PDCCH to determine whether the corresponding DCI is received is called blind detection (BD).
“A search space set consists of multiple PDCCH candidates, and different PDCCH candidates may overlap with each other. In addition, the network side can configure multiple search spaces for the UE at the same time to detect DCIs of different formats or DCIs carrying different control information. Since these search spaces may not overlap, or may overlap partially or completely, that is, the candidate PDCCHs that constitute different search spaces may overlap with each other.”
Regarding claim 8, under In Case 4, “if the base station configures UE1 based on the configuration rule 1, it is obvious that the priority of the UE-level TDD parameters should be higher than the priority of the cell-level SBFD parameters.
“Configuration rule 2: When configuring UE-level TDD parameters, the cell-level flexible symbols configured with the first UL subband or the second DL subband in the cell-level SBFD parameters must be configured as flexible symbols. In this case, the first UL subband or the second DL subband is valid.
“In Case 4, if the base station configures UE1 based on the configuration rule 2, it is obvious that the priority of the cell-level SBFD parameters should be higher than the priority of the terminal-level TDD parameters.”
Regarding claim 22, note figure 6, “Similar to the above concept, as shown in FIG6 , an embodiment of the present application also provides a communication device 600 for implementing the functions of the network device or terminal device in the above method. The form of the communication device is not limited, and can be a hardware structure, a software module, or a hardware structure plus a software module. For example, the device can be a software module or a chip system. In the embodiment of the present application, the chip system can be composed of a chip, or it can include a chip and other discrete devices. The communication device 600 may include: a processing unit 601 and a communication unit 602.”
Also, in 1. Data Scheduling in NR, “In the NR system, the physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) carries downlink control information (DCI). The DCI carried by the PDCCH that schedules the physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)/physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) contains two fields: frequency domain resource assignment and time domain resource assignment. The terminal (UE) determines a time-frequency resource block based on the information in these two fields, and PDSCH/PUSCH will be transmitted in this resource block.
“According to different uses and contents, DCI is divided into many formats and scrambled by different radio network temporary identifiers (RNTI), such as random access-radio network temporary identifier (RA-RNTI), paging identifier (P-RNTI), etc. The PDCCH information of different users is distinguished by their corresponding C-RNTI information, that is, the cyclic redundancy check (CRC) of DCI is masked by C-RNTI. The base station configures the UE with a set of candidate PDCCHs that need to monitor DCI through high-level signaling (such as RRC signaling). Since the UE does not know in advance which candidate PDCCH (PDCCH candidate) the base station will receive DCI on, but the UE knows what downlink control information DCI it currently expects to receive based on the base station configuration information, the UE must attempt to decode each candidate PDCCH in this set based on the configuration information, that is, the UE uses the corresponding RNTI to perform a CRC check on the information on the PDCCH candidate. If the CRC check succeeds, the UE knows that the DCI has been successfully obtained. Therefore, this set is the search space set, and the behavior of the UE attempting to decode each candidate PDCCH to determine whether the corresponding DCI is received is called blind detection (BD).”
The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Claim(s) 23, 24, 27, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2026/0040368 (Zeng, et al).
Zeng, et al discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (figure 12, #120), comprising one or more memories (#122), one or more processors (#121), coupled to the one or more memories (#122), configured to cause the UE (#120) to receive a configuration, from a network, associated with a random access channel occasion (RO) in one or more subband full duplex (SBFD) symbols(¶20, figure 2) and selectively receive a downlink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols based at least in part on the configuration (¶162-164, claim 8).
PNG
media_image1.png
171
409
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 24, note ¶40-42, which shows the UE does not transmit a preamble in the RO.
PNG
media_image2.png
279
204
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 27, note ¶173 which discloses receive downlink control information (DCI) associated with the downlink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols, wherein the UE receives the downlink transmission based on the downlink transmission being scheduled by the DCI.
PNG
media_image3.png
424
438
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 30, note figures 3, 14, ¶20, 162-164, claim 8, #144, 145, which shows transmit a configuration associated with a random access channel occasion (RO) in one or more subband full duplex (SBFD) symbols and selectively transmit a downlink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols based at least in part on the configuration.
PNG
media_image4.png
290
423
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The Examiner has cited particular columns and/or line/paragraphs numbers in the reference(s) applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. IN RE JUNG, No. 10-1019 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Double Patenting
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.
Claims 1 and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,531,674. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is clear that all the elements of the application claims are to be found in patent claims (as the application claims fully encompasses patent claims). The difference between the application claims and the patent claims lies in the fact that the patent claim includes many more elements and is thus much more specific. Thus, the invention of claims of the patent is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of the application claims. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since application claims are anticipated by claims of the patent, it is not patentably distinct from claims of the patent.
Current Application
An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to cause the UE to: receive a configuration, from a network, associated with a downlink transmission in one or more subband full duplex (SBFD) symbols; and selectively transmit an uplink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols based at least in part on the configuration.
22. An apparatus for wireless communication at a network node, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to cause the network node to: transmit a configuration associated with a downlink transmission in one or more subband full duplex (SBFD) symbols; and selectively monitor for an uplink transmission in the one or more SBFD symbols based at least in part on the configuration.
U.S. Patent No. 12,531,674
1. An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to: receive a configuration associated with an intra-band carrier aggregation based subband full-duplex (SBFD) operation, the configuration indicating time information and frequency information that are associated with each of a plurality of component carriers, the plurality of component carriers including at least one downlink component carrier associated with a downlink subband and at least one uplink component carrier associated with an uplink subband different from the downlink component carrier associated with the downlink subband, wherein the uplink component carrier is based at least in part on a single uplink bandwidth part (BWP) configured for an SBFD symbol and a legacy uplink-downlink symbol; and perform a communication in an SBFD slot or symbol that is based at least in part on the configuration.
16. An apparatus for wireless communication at a network node, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to: transmit a configuration associated with an intra-band carrier aggregation based subband full-duplex (SBFD) operation, the configuration indicating time information and frequency information that are associated with each of a plurality of component carriers, the plurality of component carriers including at least one downlink component carrier associated with a downlink subband and at least one uplink component carrier associated with an uplink subband different from the downlink component carrier associated with the downlink subband, wherein the uplink component carrier is based at least in part on a single uplink bandwidth part (BWP) configured for an SBFD symbol and a legacy uplink-downlink symbol; and perform a communication in an SBFD slot or symbol that is based at least in part on the configuration.
Applicants MUST either traverse the nonstatutory double patenting rejection or file a terminal disclaimer. The requirement for terminal disclaimer will NOT be held in abeyance.
eTerminal Disclaimer
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is pleased to announce the release of eTerminal Disclaimer in EFS-Web. The new eTerminal Disclaimer provides applicants with many advantages and promotes greater efficiency in the patent examination process. This web-based eTerminal Disclaimer can be filled out completely online through web-screens and no EFS-Web fillable forms are required. eTerminal Disclaimers are auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission if the request meets all of the requirements.
Fees must be paid immediately which will then provide users more financial flexibility. A paper terminal disclaimer filing requires a fee but does not guarantee a terminal disclaimer approval. Each eTerminal Disclaimer filed requires a single terminal disclaimer fee, but can include up to 50 “reference applications” and 50 “prior patents.”
For assistance with filing an eTerminal Disclaimer, or to suggest improvements, please call the Patent Electronic Business Center at 866-217-9197 (toll free) or send an email to EBC@uspto.gov.
Conclusion
If applicants wish to request for an interview, an "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form (PTOL-413A) should be submitted to the examiner prior to the interview in order to permit the examiner to prepare in advance for the interview and to focus on the issues to be discussed. This form should identify the participants of the interview, the proposed date of the interview, whether the interview will be personal, telephonic, or video conference, and should include a brief description of the issues to be discussed. A copy of the completed "Applicant Initiated Interview Request" form should be attached to the Interview Summary form, PTOL-413 at the completion of the interview and a copy should be given to applicant or applicant's representative.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM D CUMMING whose telephone number is (571)272-7861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12 noon to 6pm.
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 S. 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.
WILLIAM D. CUMMING
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2645
/WILLIAM D CUMMING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights