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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, section IV Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 filed on 02/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant cites [0111] of the Huang reference (page 12) and on page 13 states “Huang's dynamic selection process is fundamentally different from the one contemplated by the present invention…”, cites [0003] of the instant application specification and states “The selection process allows the UE to report which matrices can be used for full power, enabling the base station to schedule transmissions that maximize power output. Accordingly, the present application is directed to a problem of power management, not self- interference mitigation.”
Examiner Response:
Please note that in the cited reference to Sun et al. the UE reports matrices that can be used for full power transmission (approximate middle of [0115], Table of [0099] “…that support full power UL transmission in mode 2”). In Rahman et al. the UE reports matrices that can be used for full power transmission ([0161]-[0162], [0348] “parameter S to indicate a group of full power transmit precoding matrix indicators (TPMIs).
In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., schedule transmissions that maximize power output. Accordingly, the present application is directed to a problem of power management) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
The Examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Huang et al. at least [0111] provides a motivation for performing dynamic selection of a TPMI (by a base station), where the determined TPMI used to perform uplink precoding (precoding at UE, Huang et al. [0102], [0111]). By dynamically determining, selecting, and indicating the uplink TPMI and using the uplink TPMI, that best matches this uplink channel response matrix, the UE transmits a precoded (using the TPMI) signal that can generate the largest SINR (at the receiver (base station)). Examiner’s position is that even if the mitigating-self interference aspect of Huang et al. is taken into account, it does not constitute a teaching away from making the proposed modification which is dynamically select a power ratio (power ratio specified by a dynamically selected TPMI of Sun et al. or Rahman et al.) that best matches an uplink channel response matrix and precode an uplink signal that can generate the largest SINR (at the receiver).
Applicant’s arguments, section III. Rejection under 35 U.S.C.§ 112 filed on 02/17/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection of claims 1, 3-7, 9-13, 15-19 of the 11/21/2025 Non-Final Office Action have been fully considered and are persuasive (independent claims 1, 7, 13 and 19 have been amended to overcome the 35 U.S.C. §112(b) rejection of those claims).
In the instant Office Action, dependent claims 6, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
In the second paragraph of section III of the Remarks filed 02/17/2026, Applicant states:
Thus, a group containing only BG0 would not meet the requirement in the amended claim, as it does not provide "a plurality of distinct power ratios."
Claim 6 (depends on claim 1) claims: wherein each of the at least one precoding matrix group consists of at least one basic transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group, wherein the at least one basic TPMI group comprises at least one of: BG0: ½ [1 0 0 0];….” (emphasis added)
Based on the claim language above (“at least one of”) BG0 (alone) corresponds to the claimed “at least one precoding matrix group” (of claim 1). As already noted, Applicant states “Thus, a group containing only BG0 would not meet the requirement in the amended claim, as it does not provide "a plurality of distinct power ratios." The language of claim 6 does not exclude BG0 resulting into a conflict between the claimed “a plurality of distinct power ratios” of claim 1 and what is claimed in claim 6.
Claims 12 and 18 respectively depend on amended claims 7 and 13 (amended similar to claim 1). Claims 12 and 18 are also rejected 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, because of the conflict between the claimed “a plurality of distinct power ratios” of claims 7 and 13 and what is claimed in claims 12 and 18.
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.
Claims 6, 12, 18 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 6 (depends on claim 1) claims: wherein each of the at least one precoding matrix group consists of at least one basic transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group, wherein the at least one basic TPMI group comprises at least one of: BG0: ½ [1 0 0 0];….” (emphasis added).
Based on the claim language above (“at least one of”) BG0 (alone) corresponds to the claimed “at least one precoding matrix group” (of claim 1). As already noted, Applicant states “Thus, a group containing only BG0 would not meet the requirement in the amended claim, as it does not provide "a plurality of distinct power ratios." The language of claim 6 does not exclude BG0 resulting into a conflict between the claimed “a plurality of distinct power ratios” of claim 1 and what is claimed in claim 6.
Claims 12 and 18 respectively depend on amended claims 7 and 13 (amended similar to claim 1). Claims 12 and 18 are also rejected 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, because of the conflict between the claimed “a plurality of distinct power ratios” of claims 7 and 13 and what is claimed in claims 12 and 18 (BG0 meeting the claimed “at least one”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-7, 9-13, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (U.S. 2021/0258886) in view of Huang et al. (U.S. 2022/0329308).
With respect to claim 1, Sun et al. disclose:
A wireless communication method for a wireless terminal, comprising: reporting, to a wireless network node, at least one precoding matrix group of at least one codeword according to a transmission mode (refer to at least [0099] UE indicates (reports) to a wireless network node (base station BS) at least one precoding matrix group (one of G1, G2, G3, G4, G5, G6), as disclosed in the table (excluding group G0), the at least one precoding matrix group (of the TPMIs excluding G0) identifies or corresponds to at least one codeword (a precoder matrix), also refer to [0100], lines 1-7 of [0103], [0105]. Alternatively or additionally refer to Fig. 6 step 606 ([0115]-[0117] “…the index can be an index of the TPMI group.” The one or more TPMIs in the TPMI group (or TPMI list, line 10 of [0111]) support full power transmission mode by the UE), wherein the at least one codeword supports full power transmission (lines 1-2 of [0008], [0097], lines 1-2 of [0099] and the at least one codeword of the groups (excluding G0 and its codeword) ,[0102], [0118]);
receiving, from the wireless network node (from the BS), at least one codeword which is reported by the wireless terminal (Fig. 6, step 608, lines 1-3 of [0118] “receives an indication of at least one TPMI from the TPMI list…”, the TPMI identifies or corresponds to at least one codeword);
and performing a transmission based on a power ratio of one of the at least one codeword (step 610, [0118], full power transmission of uplink data, by the UE using the at least one codeword of the (full power) TPMI (608). Regarding the claimed “a power ratio of one of the at least one codeword”, refer to a specific TPMI of the TPMIs of a group within the table of [0099], for example 1/2 [1 0 0 0] of G2, for layer 1 transmission, the other options within G2 for layer 1 transmission are: 1/2 [0 1 0 0] and 1/2 [0 0 1 0], the claimed power ratio of one is interpreted to correspond to the power ratio of one codeword (or precoding matrix) e.g. 1/2 [1 0 0 0] of Sun et al. defined by the position of “1” in the codeword (precoding matrix)), wherein a number of antenna ports configured for the transmission or a number of antenna ports configured for sounding reference signals (SRS) resources of the transmission is 4 (refer to at least the last sentence of [0100] 4-port non coherent can indicate groups G1-G3 …and a partial-coherent UE can use groups G1-G6…” excluding the G0), also refer to [0106] disclosing alternative or additional TPMI groups for partial-coherent UEs), and the power ratio (defined by the position of “1” and “0s”) is selectable from a plurality of distinct power ratios (refer to the mentioned options for layer 1 transmission within TPMI group G2 mentioned above (for example), distinct power ratios disclosed in 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 1 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0] which distribute all the power to a different antenna port), provided by the at least one precoding matrix group (e.g. group G2)
each distinct power ratio (distinct in terms of which antenna port the power is distributed) being associated with a codeword (layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [1 0 0 0], or layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [0 1 0 0], or layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [0 0 1 0] in G2) within the precoding matrix group (G2) that defines a non-uniform power distribution across the 4 antenna ports (e.g. TPMI group G2 and layer 1 transmission with non-uniform power distribution across the 4 antenna ports according to the position of “1” (and “0s”) in 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 1 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0]).
Sun et al. do not expressly disclose: dynamically selectable.
In the same field of endeavor, Huang et al. disclose: dynamically selectable (refer to at least [0111] “…the base station 105-c may dynamically determine TPMI or SRI based on the measurement of the uplink reference signal for transmission to the UE 115-d. In some cases, a determination of the TPMI is based on a derived UE 115-d uplink channel response matrix by measuring the uplink reference signal (e.g., SRS), and then selecting an index of the uplink precoding codeword that best matches this uplink channel response matrix (e.g., that can generate the largest SINR) as the determined TPMI).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the selection of the power ratio (by TPMI (precoder matrix) selection explained above) performed by base station (network node) of Sun et al. to be dynamically selectable as taught by Huang et al. using a derived uplink channel response matrix obtained by measuring an uplink reference signal and selecting a TPMI (of Sun et al.) that best matches this uplink channel response matrix e.g., that can generate the largest SINR.
With respect to claim 3, modified Sun et al. disclose: wherein a coherent capability of antenna ports configured for the transmission is non-coherent or partial-coherent (approximate second half of [0100], partial-coherent UE of [0103], [0106]).
With respect to claim 4, modified Sun et al. disclose: wherein a codeword is a precoder or a precoding matrix (as disclosed by at least the table (s) of TPMI Group, [0106], a codeword corresponds to a precoder or a precoding matrix, also last sentence of [0115], also at least lines 1-5 of [0104]).
With respect to claim 5, modified Sun et al. disclose: wherein the at least one precoding matrix group is transmitted by transmitting at least one transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group (at least [0117] TPMI list (or TPMI group, line 10 of [0111]) corresponding to the at least one precoding matrix group.
With respect to claim 6, modified Sun et al. disclose: wherein each of the at least one precoding matrix group consists of at least one basic transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group, wherein the at least one basic TPMI group comprises at least one of: (Although the Examiner has not replicated the expressions for the claimed BG1through BG6, refer to at least [0099], [0106] of Sun et al., refer to the disclosed basic TPMI Groups: G2 through G6 whose expressions match those claimed by BG1 through BG6. For example, refer to G2 of the table of [0099] of Sun et al. and the claimed BG2).
With respect to claim 7, Sun et al. disclose:
A wireless communication method for use in a wireless network node, comprising: receiving, from a wireless terminal (refer to at least [0099] UE indicates (reports) to a wireless network node (base station BS), “a group of TPMIs” (one of G1, G2, G3, G4, G5, G6) as disclosed in the table (excluding G0), the group of TPMIs identifies or corresponds to at least one codeword (precoder matrix), also refer to [0100], lines 1-7 of [0103], [0105]. Alternatively or additionally refer to Fig. 6 step 606 ([0115]-[0117] “…the index can be an index of the TPMI group.” The one or more TPMIs in the TPMI group (or TPMI list, line 10 of [0111]) support full power transmission mode by the UE. The base station (BS corresponds to the claimed wireless network node) disclosed in 606 performs the claimed receiving), at least one precoding matrix group of at least one codeword according to a transmission mode (the disclosed full power transmission mode), wherein the at least one codeword supports full power transmission (lines 1-2 of [0008], [0097], lines 1-2 of [0099] and the at least one codeword of the groups (excluding G0 and its codeword),[0102], [0118]);
transmitting, to the wireless terminal, at least one configured codeword (Fig. 6, step 608 transmitted by the BS to the UE, lines 1-3 of [0118] “receives an indication of at least one TPMI from the TPMI list…” transmitted by the BS); and performing a reception (reception of the uplink data transmitted at 610) based on a power ratio of one of the at least one configured codeword (the transmitted data is based on the at least one configured codeword (of the indicated TPMI). Regarding the claimed “a power ratio of one of the at least one codeword”, refer to a specific TPMI of the TPMIs of a group within the table of [0099] (excluding G0), for example 1/2 [1 0 0 0] of G2, for layer 1 transmission, the other options within G2 for layer 1 transmission are: 1/2 [0 1 0 0] and 1/2 [0 0 1 0]. The claimed power ratio of one is interpreted to correspond to the power ratio defined by the position of “1” within the codeword (or precoding matrix) 1/2 [1 0 0 0] of Sun et al. The performing reception of the transmission by the BS is based on (or in response to) at least one configured codeword of the indicated TPMI (indicated to the UE from the BS of Sun et al.)), wherein a number of antenna ports configured for the transmission or the number of antenna ports configured for sounding reference signal, SRS, resources of the transmission is 4 (refer to at least the last sentence of [0100] 4-port non coherent can indicate groups G1-G3 …and a partial-coherent UE can use groups G1-G6…”, excluding G0, also refer to [0106] disclosing alternative or additional TPMI groups for partial-coherent UEs), and wherein the power ratio is selectable from a plurality of distinct power ratios (refer to the mentioned options for layer 1 transmission within TPMI group G2 mentioned above (for example), distinct power ratios disclosed in 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 1 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0] which distribute all the power to a different antenna port (in light of Applicant’s Remarks section 3)), provided by the at least one precoding matrix group (e.g. group G2), each distinct power ratio being associated with a codeword (layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [1 0 0 0], or layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [0 1 0 0], or layer 1 codeword of 1/2 [0 0 1 0] in G2) within the corresponding precoding matrix group (G2) that defines a non-uniform power distribution across the 4 antenna ports (e.g. TPMI group G2 and layer 1 transmission with non-uniform power distribution across the 4 antenna ports).
Sun et al. do not expressly disclose: dynamically selectable.
In the same field of endeavor, Huang et al. disclose: dynamically selectable (refer to at least [0111] “…the base station 105-c may dynamically determine TPMI or SRI based on the measurement of the uplink reference signal for transmission to the UE 115-d. In some cases, a determination of the TPMI is based on a derived UE 115-d uplink channel response matrix by measuring the uplink reference signal (e.g., SRS), and then selecting an index of the uplink precoding codeword that best matches this uplink channel response matrix (e.g., that can generate the largest SINR) as the determined TPMI).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the selection of the power ratio (by TPMI (precoder matrix) selection as explained above) performed by base station (network node) of Sun et al. to be dynamically selectable as taught by Huang et al. using a derived uplink channel response matrix obtained by measuring an uplink reference signal and selecting a TPMI (of Sun et al.) that best matches this uplink channel response matrix e.g., that can generate the largest SINR.
Claims 9-12 are rejected based on the reasoning used to reject claims 3-6 above.
With respect to claim 13, claim 13 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 1 above and the UE of Sun et al. includes the claimed “a processor” refer to [0005] disclosing at least the claimed processor, also lines 1-6 of [0067] relating to Fig. 3, lines 1-8 of [0074]).
Claims 15-18 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject claims 3-6 above.
Claim 19 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 7 above and the BS of Sun et al. includes the claimed processor refer to [0010] disclosing at least the claimed processor, also for example the BS of Fig. 4 (lines 1-3 of [0077]) refer to processor 404, lines 1-8 of [0083]).
8. Claims 1, 3-7, 9-13, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahman et al. (U.S. 2020/0336998) in view of Huang et al. (U.S. 2022/0329308).
With respect to claim 1, Rahman et al. disclose:
reporting, to a wireless network node, at least one precoding matrix group of at least one codeword according to a transmission mode (Fig. 14, step 1402, [0347]-[0348], UE (wireless terminal) transmits (performs reporting) to a BS (wireless network node) capability information “including a parameter S to indicate a group of full power transmit precoding matrix indicators (TPMIs)” and refer for example to Table 1 on page 23 (excluding G0) and (Table 42 on page 22), refer to Alt B or Alt C of table 42 comprises the shown in bits mapped to TPMI group or groups as shown in at least Table 1, also at least lines 5-9 of [0152], [0162] UL full power mode, and associated Tables 40 and 41 (Gx matrices disclosed in Table 42) with the “G0” TPMI group excluded) Optionally refer to the Tables of [0358]-[0359] with G0 TPMI group excluded), wherein the at least one codeword supports full power transmission (a Gx (excluding G0) includes codewords (TPMI pre-coders/pre-coding matrices as shown in at least Table 42, second column, full power transmission is supported, refer to at least [0348], at least lines 5-9 of [0152], [0162] UL full power mode disclosed); receiving, from the wireless network node, at least one codeword which is reported by the wireless terminal (Fig. 14, step 1404. [0349], [0353]-[0354], the precoding matrix of the TPMI corresponds to the claimed codeword which is reported by the wireless terminal (UE) in step 1402); and performing a transmission based on a power ratio of one of the at least one codeword (Fig. 14, steps 1406-1410, [0350]-[0354] where the indicated (by the BS) TPMI indicates a precoding matrix for PUSCH transmission (performed in 1410). Refer to Table 40 or Table 41, or Table 1 on page 23 and Table 42, depending on the selected TPMI (of Table 42) e.g. G1 for rank 1 transmission 1/2 [1 0 0 0] or 1/2 [0 0 1 0] is selected and the power ratio is defined by the position of “1” (and “0s”) in the codeword and [0116]), wherein a number of antenna ports configured for the transmission or the number of antenna ports configured for sounding reference signal (SRS) resources of the transmission is 4 ([0162] and Tables 40, 41, Table 1 on page 23. Optionally refer to the Tables of [0358]-[0359]), and wherein the power ratio is selectable from a plurality of distinct power ratios (e.g. selectable from G1 for rank 1 transmission using a selected one of 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0]) provided by the at least one precoding matrix group, each distinct power ratio being (power ratio corresponding to 1/2 [1 0 0 0] or 1/2 [0 0 1 0]) associated with a codeword (the codeword corresponding to or indicating 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0]) within the precoding matrix group (G1) that defines a non-uniform power distribution across the 4 antenna ports (power ratio defined by the position of “1” (and “0s”) in the 1/2 [1 0 0 0], 1/2 [0 0 1 0] in TPMI group G1).
Rahman et al. do not expressly disclose: dynamically selectable.
In the same field of endeavor, Huang et al. disclose: dynamically selectable (refer to at least [0111] “…the base station 105-c may dynamically determine TPMI or SRI based on the measurement of the uplink reference signal for transmission to the UE 115-d. In some cases, a determination of the TPMI is based on a derived UE 115-d uplink channel response matrix by measuring the uplink reference signal (e.g., SRS), and then selecting an index of the uplink precoding codeword that best matches this uplink channel response matrix (e.g., that can generate the largest SINR) as the determined TPMI).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the selection of the power ratio (by TPMI (precoder matrix) selection as explained above) performed by base station of Rahman et al. to be dynamically selectable as taught by Huang et al. using a derived uplink channel response matrix obtained by measuring an uplink reference signal and selecting a TPMI (of Rahman et al..) that best matches this uplink channel response matrix e.g., that can generate the largest SINR.
With respect to claim 3, modified Rahman et al. disclose: wherein a coherent capability of antenna ports configured for the transmission is non-coherent or partial-coherent (Table 1, on page 23 “partial-coherent UE with 4 antenna ports”, lines 16-18 of [0107]. Also refer to [0355], non-coherent or partial coherent coherence capability of the UE is reported and refer to [0162] and Table 40 or Table 41).
With respect to claim 4, modified Rahman et al. disclose: wherein a codeword is a precoder or a precoding matrix (last 2 lines of [0005], [0353]).
With respect to claim 5, modified Rahman et al. disclose: wherein the at least one precoding matrix group is transmitted by transmitting at least one transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group corresponding to the at least one precoding matrix group (step 1402 of Fig. 14 or refer to Table 40 or Table 41 or Table 42 or Table 1 on page 23 excluding G0).
With respect to claim 6, modified Rahman et al. disclose: wherein each of the at least one precoding matrix group consists of at least one basic TPMI group, wherein the at least one basic transmitted precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) group comprises at least one of: (Although the Examiner has not replicated the expressions for the claimed BG0 through BG6, refer to at least the Table of [0358] G1-G6 match the claimed BG1 through BG6. Alternatively refer to Table 41, Alt A or Atl B and disclosed G1-G6 (matrices disclosed in Table 42) that match the claimed BG1 through BG6).
Claims 7, 9-12 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject claims 1, 3-6 above and from the point of view of the BS (wireless network node) of Rahman et al. and refer to Fig. 15 (steps performed by the BS and are complementary to the steps performed by the UE of Fig. 14, [0361]-[0365]).
Claim 13 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 1 above. Rahman et al. further disclose the claimed “a processor” Fig. 3, for example refer to processor 340 ([0061], “control the overall operation of the UE”, lines 1-3 of [0062] “…for UL transmission on uplink channel”, and refer to the uplink transmission at 1410 of Fig. 14).
Claims 13, 15-18 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject claims 3-6 above.
Claim 19 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 7 above. Rahman et al. further discloses the claimed the claimed “a processor” (Fig. 2, for example refer to processor 225 ([0051] as applied to Fig. 15 performed by the wireless network node).
Conclusion
9. 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.
Contact Information
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA VLAHOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5507. The examiner can normally be reached M 8:00-4:00, TWRF 8:00-2:00.
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, SAM K AHN can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
SOPHIA VLAHOS
Examiner
Art Unit 2633
/SOPHIA VLAHOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633 3/13/2026