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 .
Double Patenting
1. 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 obviousness-type 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); and 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) maybe used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
2. Claims 28 – 54 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 - 24 of U. S. Patent No. 12,402,085 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the "right to exclude" already granted in the patent.
Claims 28 – 54 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 24 of U.S. Patent No. 12,402,085. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because present application is obvious in view of the claims 1 - 24 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,402,085. Specifically, the claims of U.S. Patent (12,402,085) are the same elements, same function, and same result as claims of present application. Omission of element and its function in combination is obvious expedient if remaining elements perform same functions as before. In re KARLSON (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184 (1963).
More specifically, the claims 28 – 54 of the present application is the same elements, same function, and same result as claims 1 - 24 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085), specially, the independent claim 28 of the present application is the same invention as the independent claim 1 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows, and the difference of the limitations are wordings differently.
For example;
Instant Application
U.S Patent 12,402,085
1. 1. A method comprising: receiving, by a wireless device, one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages comprising one or more configuration parameters for physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions, wherein the one or more configuration parameters indicate: pathloss reference reference signals (RSs); and power control sets identified by sounding reference signal resource indicator (SRI) PUSCH power control indexes, wherein a pathloss reference RS index, of each power control set of the power control sets, indicates a respective pathloss reference RS of the pathloss reference RSs; receiving downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a PUSCH transmission, wherein the DCI does not comprise an SRI field; and after receiving the DCI, transmitting the PUSCH transmission using a transmission power determined based on a downlink pathloss estimate associated with a pathloss reference RS mapped to a power control set identified with an SRI PUSCH power control index equal to zero.
28. A wireless device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to: receive one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages comprising one or more configuration parameters for physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions, wherein the one or more configuration parameters indicate: pathloss reference reference signals (RSs); and power control sets identified by sounding reference signal resource indicator (SRI) PUSCH power control indexes, wherein a pathloss reference RS index, of each power control set of the power control sets, indicates a respective pathloss reference RS of the pathloss reference RSs; receive downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a PUSCH transmission, wherein the DCI does not comprise an SRI field; and after reception of the DCI, transmit the PUSCH transmission using a transmission power determined based on a downlink pathloss estimate associated with a pathloss reference RS mapped to a power control set identified with an SRI PUSCH power control set index equal to zero.
The additional limitation is not affecting the scope of the present invention. In addition, even though the claim of present application omitted or rearrangement of the claim structure (simply rearranged and restructured the claim elements using same or similar words), the limitation of independent claim 1 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085) is encompassed the claimed invention of the independent claim 28 of the present application.
Therefore, the function and results of the claim invention of present application are same as the claim invention of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
Furthermore, the dependent claim 29 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 2 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 30 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 3 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 31 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 4 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 32 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 5 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 33 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 8 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 34 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 9 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The independent claim 35 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 10 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 36 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 11 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The independent claim 37 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 12 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 38 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 13 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 39 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 14 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 40 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 15 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The independent claim 41 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 6 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The independent claim 42 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 7 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 43 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 16 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 44 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 17 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 45 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 18 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 46 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 19 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The independent claim 47 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 20 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 48 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 21 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 49 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 22 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 50 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 24 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 51 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 23 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
The dependent claim 52 of the present application are same function and same result as claim 12 of the U.S. Patent (12,402,085).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 53 and 54 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhou et al. (US 2019/0075524) discloses Uplink Beam Management.
MolavianJazi et al. (US 2019/0349867) discloses Method and Apparatus for Transmitting an Uplink Transmission Based on a Pathloss Estimate.
Xu et al. (US 2020/0267663) discloses Power Control with Multiple Panels in a Radio System.
Zhang (US 2019/0044681) discloses System and Method for Uplink Power Control Framework.
Information regarding...Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system... at 866-217-9197 (toll-free)."
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7880. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (8:00am-5:00pm).
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, Yuwen Pan can be reached on 571-272-7855. 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.
J.L
June 10, 2026
John J Lee
/JOHN J LEE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights