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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/07/2024, 01/07/2025, 08/22/2025 and 10/30/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,219. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claimed limitations are similar in scope and the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,219.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12 are allowable over prior art.
Claims 13-35 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowable subject matter:
Applicant’s independent claim 2 recites, inter alia, “encode a first set of uplink control information bits associated with a first priority and a second set of uplink control information bits associated with a second priority; multiplex the encoded first set of uplink control information bits and the encoded second set of uplink control information bits to a physical uplink control channel”. Applicant’s independent claim 2 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Applicant’s independent claim 13 recites, inter alia, “encoding a first set of uplink control information bits associated with a first priority and a second set of uplink control information bits associated with a second priority, the encoding of the first set of uplink control information bits in accordance with whether the first set of uplink control information bits comprises one bit or two bits; multiplexing the encoded first set of uplink control information bits associated with the first priority with the second set of uplink control information bits associated with the second priority”. Applicant’s independent claim 13 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Applicant’s independent claim 18 recites, inter alia, “demultiplex the encoded first set of uplink control information bits associated with the first priority from the encoded second set of uplink control information bits associated with the second priority; and decode the encoded first set of uplink control information bits and the encoded second set of uplink control information bits, the decoding of the encoded first set of uplink control information bits in accordance with whether the encoded first set of uplink control information bits comprises one bit or two bits”. Applicant’s independent claim 18 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Applicant’s independent claim 22 recites, inter alia, “multiplex an encoded first set of uplink control information bits associated with a first priority and an encoded second set of uplink control information bits associated with a second priority to a physical uplink control channel by mapping the encoded first set of uplink control information bits and the encoded second set of uplink control information bits to a set of symbols according to a mapping rule”. Applicant’s independent claim 22 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Independent claim 27 is interpreted and allowed for the same reason as set forth in claim 22.
Applicant’s independent claim 32 recites, inter alia, “demultiplex the encoded first set of uplink control information bits and the encoded second set of uplink control information bits from a physical uplink control channel by demapping the encoded first set of uplink control information bits and the encoded second set of uplink control information bits from a set of symbols according to a mapping rule.”. Applicant’s independent claim 32 comprises a particular combination of elements, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (US 2022/0248410) teaches method of multiplexing first uplink signal and second uplink signal to PUCCH resource configured to have priorities.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YU-WEN CHANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7645. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-5:00pm PT.
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, Un Cho can be reached at 571-272-7919. 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.
/YU-WEN CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
