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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the first paragraph of the specification should include that SN 17/576,611 is now US Patent Number 12,063,621.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
(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, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Applicant’s submission of prior art, Jiang et al., US Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0208387 (hereinafter Jiang).
Regarding claims 1, 16, and 20, Jiang discloses an electronic device, comprising: one or more antennas [inherent]; and a network interface coupled to the one or more antennas [inherent] and configured to: receive an indication of an allocated period of ranging, wherein the indication is received in an anchor carrier frequency [paragraph 0129]; based on the indication, initiate ranging transmission using the allocated period of ranging [paragraph 0130]; after completing the ranging transmission, receive ranging signal reflections [paragraph 0131]; and perform object detection based on the received ranging signal reflections [paragraph 0131]. Further regarding claims 16 and 20, the limitation disclosing “initiating a carrier sensing and collision avoidance procedure” is synonymous to allocating a period of ranging.
Regarding claim 11, Jiang discloses wherein the indication indicates a first sub-slot for the ranging transmission and indicates a second sub-slot for receiving the ranging signal reflections [paragraphs 0129, 0131].
Regarding claim 12, Jiang discloses wherein the indication indicates how long to delay initiation of ranging transmission after receiving the indication before initiating the ranging transmission [paragraph 0129].
Regarding claim 15, Jiang discloses wherein the network interface delays listening for the ranging signal reflections until an allocated sub-slot after completing the ranging transmission [paragraph 0131].
Claim(s) 1, 12, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Martorana, US Patent Application Publication Number 2002/0155845 (hereinafter Martorana).
Regarding claims 1, 16, and 20, Martorana discloses an electronic device, comprising: one or more antennas [inherent]; and a network interface coupled to the one or more antennas [inherent] and configured to: receive an indication of an allocated period of ranging, wherein the indication is received in an anchor carrier frequency [paragraph 0070]; based on the indication, initiate ranging transmission using the allocated period of ranging [paragraph 0070]; after completing the ranging transmission, receive ranging signal reflections [paragraph 0070]; and perform object detection based on the received ranging signal reflections [paragraph 0070]. Further regarding claims 16 and 20, the limitation disclosing “initiating a carrier sensing and collision avoidance procedure” is synonymous to allocating a period of ranging.
Regarding claim 12, Martorana discloses wherein the indication indicates how long to delay initiation of ranging transmission after receiving the indication before initiating the ranging transmission [paragraphs 0071-0072].
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.
Claim(s) 2-8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang.
Regarding claim 2, Jiang does not specifically disclose that the ranging transmission uses a ranging carrier outside of an anchor carrier used for cellular communications by the electronic device. However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art to perform ranging on a different carrier than the carrier used to indicate the ranging period. Before the effective filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this feature. The motivation for this modification would have been to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 3, Jiang discloses the anchor carrier is used for downlink communications and uplink communications for the electronic device, and the indication is received using the ancho carrier [paragraph 0129].
Regarding claims 4 and 17, Jiang does not specifically disclose a frequency of the ranging carrier is higher than the anchor carrier frequency. Regarding claims 5 and 7, Jiang does not specifically disclose the frequency of the ranging carrier is in an unlicensed or licensed spectrum. The Examiner takes Official Notice that these features of the frequency are well known in the art. Before the effective filing of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include this feature. The motivation for this modification would have been to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Further, these characteristics of the frequency lack criticality to the overall function of the invention.
Regarding claims 6 and 8, Jiang discloses the indication comprises a wireless network command received from the wireless network base station [paragraph 0036].
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, 16 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,229,002. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are generic to all that is recited in the patented claims and are therefore an obvious variant thereof. Instant independent claims 1, 16 and 20 are taught in patented claim 1 and are broader as they omit the limitation regarding encoding the ranging signals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 10, 13-14, and 18-19 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.
Kurihara, US Patent Number 7,299,063, discloses a wireless communication system for performing ranging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIKA WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-7841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-270-5371. 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.
/EAW/
July 27, 2026
/ERIKA A WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights