DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/07/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
3. This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 06/15/2026. Claims 23-38 and 41 are pending in this application and have been considered below. Claims 39-40 are canceled by the applicant.
4. Applicant arguments regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roy et al. (WO 2021178941) of claims 23-25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner thoroughly reviewed Applicant’s arguments but firmly believes that the cited reference reasonably and properly meets the claimed limitation as rejected. See claim construction and examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims below.
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 26-38 and 41 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 38 and 41 has been withdrawn.
Claim Construction
6. Contingent Limitations:
The contingent/conditional limitations are not positively recited in the claim(s) and are thus only executed [or performed or implemented], when the condition is true/met.
[See, (MPEP 2111.04) II.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.
(1) Claim 23 recites the following contingent limitations: “in response to determining that the object is present or moving, initiating sensing of the object using a second parameter setting that provides increased sensing capability relative to the first parameter, the initiating comprising transmitting a second signal having the second parameter setting; or causing a further node to transmit the second signal; wherein the increased sensing capability comprises at least one of: a higher resolution, a wider range, or a higher reliability.” Claim 23 is drafted as a method (process). "when a target condition (in response to determining) is met..." clause acts as a strict condition precedent. The above limitations are contingent because they recite steps that are only required to be performed if their condition precedent is met. If the condition never occurs, the steps do not need to be performed for the method to infringe or be anticipated. Therefore, the BRI of claim 23 requires the steps to be performed only if the condition is met. However, if the condition never occurs, the steps do not need to be performed for the method to infringe or be anticipated.
7. 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.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well.
Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states:
A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
9. Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roy et al. (WO 2021178941) (hereinafter Roy).
Regarding claims 23:
A method performed by a first radio node (see WTRU in figures 1-6) for handling object sensing in an environment served by a wireless communication network (see figure 1A) employing joint communication and sensing (par 0023, 0082-0084), the method comprising:
transmitting a first signal having a first parameter setting for sensing in the environment (in par 0144 Roy teaches “The WTRU, for example, may transmit a sensing signal using the allocated resources and the granted sensing parameter set of one ("a first") active or activated sensing configurations (interpreted to be a first parameter setting), and may perform one or more measurements related to the transmitted sensing signal. The WTRU, for example, may measure a power of a backscatter associated with (e.g., resulting from) the transmitted sensing signal. The sensing signal may be or include one or more reference signals (RSs)”. Also see par 0123-0130); and
receiving a reflection of the first signal (par 0085-0088) or information indicative of the reflection;
determining, based on the reflection or the information, that an object is present or moving in the environment (par 0171, 0390-0392); and
in response to determining that the object is present or moving, initiating sensing of the object using a second parameter setting that provides increased sensing capability relative to the first parameter, the initiating comprising
transmitting a second signal having the second parameter setting; or causing a further node to transmit the second signal;
wherein the increased sensing capability comprises at least one of: a higher resolution, a wider range, or a higher reliability.
Claim 23 recites the following contingent limitations: “in response to determining that the object is present or moving, initiating sensing of the object using a second parameter setting that provides increased sensing capability relative to the first parameter, the initiating comprising transmitting a second signal having the second parameter setting; or causing a further node to transmit the second signal; wherein the increased sensing capability comprises at least one of: a higher resolution, a wider range, or a higher reliability.” Claim 23 is drafted as a method (process). "when a target condition (in response to determining) is met..." clause acts as a strict condition precedent. The above limitations are contingent because they recite steps that are only required to be performed if their condition precedent is met. If the condition never occurs, the steps do not need to be performed for the method to infringe or be anticipated. Therefore, the BRI of claim 23 requires the steps to be performed only if the condition is met. However, if the condition never occurs, the steps do not need to be performed for the method to infringe or be anticipated.
Regarding claim 24:
Roy further discloses wherein receiving the reflection of the first signal (par 0085-0088) or information indicative of the reflection comprises receiving the reflection at the first radio node a delayed and/or distorted version of the first signal (see measured interference signal in par 0273-0274).
Regarding claim 25:
Roy further discloses receiving the reflection of the first signal (par 0085-0088) or information indicative of the reflection comprises receiving the information from one or more other radio nodes (figures 1C and 1D show receiving the information from one or more other radio nodes) that received the reflection (see figures 1C and 1D), the one or more other radio nodes including the second radio node and a third radio node (see plurality of radio nodes in figures 1C and 1D).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claim 26-38 and 41 are allowed.
11. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, Roy does not teach or suggest, in combination with all other limitations in the claim, responsive to receiving the report causing transmission of a second signal having a second parameter setting that provides increased sensing capability relative to the first parameter setting wherein the increased sensing capability comprises one or more of: a higher resolution, a wider range, or a higher reliability.
Conclusion
12. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whose telephone number is (571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 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, Hannah S Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/KABIR A TIMORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights