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 .
Priority
1. The present application is a continuation of application 17594894 filed 11/2/21.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
2. Regarding the Applicant’s arguments related to the 35 USC § 112(b) rejection, the arguments and amendments put forth have been fully considered, but are only partially persuasive. There were several grounds of rejection under 35 USC § 112(b).
First, regarding whether “exchanging COMP messages for the joint COMP status” entails messages configuring or arranging the COMP, or data sent via COMP: the Applicant has added a limitation in response—“wherein the COMP messages comprise user data or control messages”--. The Examiner notes that this is insufficient to resolve the ambiguity, and the ground of rejection still holds.
Second, regarding whether “providing wireless connectivity for entirety of wireless device[sic] serviced by the network device” is intended to be connectivity for the plurality of “wireless devices[sic]” earlier in the claim, or a single device, the Applicant’s amendment directing the limitation to the “plurality of wireless devices” removes the grounds of rejection.
Third, the Applicant’s amendment regarding the scope of fractional bandwidth removes the grounds of rejection related to the size/scope of the fractional bandwidth.
Finally, regarding the ambiguity in the claims about where the fractional COMP and fractional bandwidth occur, the Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive. The Applicant cites paragraphs [0776] and [0779], but these paragraphs do not disclose a “fractional bandwidth” on the backhaul. They discuss the backhaul, and fractional COMP, but not a backhaul with a “fractional bandwidth”. Fractional COMP is a term of art, and is understood to be related to the bandwidth of the air interface. However, the independent claims state “a backhaul connection on which a fractional bandwidth is used for COMP messages… compared to a fractional bandwidth used for providing wireless connectivity”. A plain reading of this requires less than the full backhaul bandwidth to be used. However, this reading does not appear to be what is intended in the original disclosure, although it is ambiguous. If the Applicant intends to claim limitations compatible with the known understanding of fractional COMP, the Examiner suggests language along the lines of “wherein the providing wireless connectivity includes exchanging COMP messages for the joint COMP status with neighboring network devices on a backhaul connection used for the COMP messages in conjunction with a bandwidth used for providing wireless connectivity for entirety of wireless devices”. However, the claim limitations as presented are ambiguous, and therefore rejected.
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.
3. Claims 1 – 4, 6 – 7, 9, and 16 – 28 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 “wherein the providing wireless connectivity includes exchanging COMP messages for the joint COMP status with neighboring network devices on a backhaul connection on which a fractional bandwidth is used for the COMP messages compared to a bandwidth used for providing wireless connectivity for entirety of wireless devices served by the network device, wherein the fractional bandwidth is less than the bandwidth, and wherein the COMP messages comprise user data or control messages.” There are several issues with this claim limitation.
First, it is unclear whether “exchanging COMP messages for the joint COMP status” entails messages configuring or arranging the COMP, or data sent via COMP. The further limitation that “wherein the COMP messages comprise user data or control messages” does not disambiguate. The issue is that it is unclear if the claimed messages are user to maintain and create the joint COMP status, or if they are sent using joint COMP.
Second, a plain reading of the claim language appears to state the “fractional bandwidth” of the fractional COMP is a fraction of the bandwidth on the backhaul. The independent claims state “a backhaul connection on which a fractional bandwidth is used for COMP messages… compared to a fractional bandwidth used for providing wireless connectivity”. A plain reading of this requires less than the full backhaul bandwidth to be used. This is not consistent with the notion of fractional COMP as it is known in the art—fractional COMP deals with using a subset of the configured transmission points, so the fractional bandwidth if anything would be the air interface, rather than the backhaul. The application is clearly directed towards fractional COMP (see Title and e.g. paragraph [00773]), but it is unclear if the Applicant is intending to somehow extend this onto the backhaul. However, the plain reading of extending the fractional COMP to the backhaul does not appear to be what is intended in the original disclosure, although it is ambiguous. If the Applicant intends to claim limitations compatible with the known understanding of fractional COMP, the Examiner suggests language along the lines of “wherein the providing wireless connectivity includes exchanging COMP messages for the joint COMP status with neighboring network devices on a backhaul connection used for the COMP messages in conjunction with a bandwidth used for providing wireless connectivity for entirety of wireless devices”. However, the claim limitations as presented are ambiguous, and therefore rejected.
Conclusion
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 STEPHEN STEINER whose telephone number is (571)272-9825. The examiner can normally be reached M - R 08:00 - 16:00; F 08:00 - 12:00.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 5712723139. 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.
/S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/RICKY Q NGO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2464
