CTNF 18/797,062 CTNF 82084 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,096,461 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. As to claim 1, claim 15 of ‘461 discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor configured to (“an apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor …”) identify overheating of the transceiver and/or the at least one processor, and wirelessly transmit, to a base station via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating (“at least one processor configured to identity overheating …”), and selectively process a transport block wirelessly received from the base station, based on the overheating assistance information (“wherein the overheating assistance information includes …”). 08-34 Claim 12,16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4,13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,096,461 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. As to claim 12, claim 4 of ‘461 discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor configured to (claim 1: “an apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor …”) identify overheating of the transceiver and/or the at least one processor, and wirelessly transmit, to a base station via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating (claim 1: “at least one processor configured to identify overheating …”), wherein the overheating assistance information further includes information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated (claim 4: “ wherein the overheating assistance information …”). As to claim 16, claim 13 of ‘461 discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor configured to (claim 10: “an apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor …”) wirelessly receive, from a user equipment via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information generated based on overheating of the user equipment, and wirelessly transmit radio resources scheduled based on the overheating assistance information to the user equipment via the transceiver (claim 10: “at least one processor configured to wirelessly receive …”), wherein the overheating assistance information includes information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated. (claim 13: “wherein the overheating assistance information …”). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 7-11 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. As to claim 7, (a) “a ratio of a maximum PDSCH to be decoded by the at least one processor per unit time” is indefinite. First, it is unclear what “maximum PDSCH” means: does this term mean the maximum number of PDSCH resources? Does it mean the “maximum” PDSCH out of all PDSCHs, whatever “maximum” means? There may be other possible interpretations, pursuant to the broadest reasonable interpretation claim construction standard. Second, a “ratio” would customarily require two numerical quantities; however, the recitation quoted above would appear to only feature one quantity: “a maximum PDSCH”. (b) “the maximum PDSCH to be decoded” is indefinite for the same reasons set forth above. As to claims 8-11, these claims are rejected as indefinite for depending from indefinite parent claim 7, and for not further reciting subject matter that would address the indefiniteness of parent claim 7. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0053763 A1 to Ljung, in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0385804 A1 to Ye et al . As to claim 12, Ljung discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver (Figs. 1 and 2, disclosing UE and BS, including CPU, MEMory and transceivers, the UE teaching the recited apparatus here); and at least one processor configured to (Figs. 1 and 2, disclosing UE, including CPU, MEMory and transceivers) identify overheating of the transceiver and/or the at least one processor (Fig. 2, paragraphs 52-56: “the temperature at the interface 1022 and/or at the processor 1021 may rise above a certain threshold”; paragraphs 8-17, 37-47, teaching the UE identifying overheating at the transceiver and/or the processor), and wirelessly transmit, to a base station via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating (Fig. 2, paragraphs 52-56: “the temperature at the interface 1022 and/or at the processor 1021 may rise above a certain threshold”; paragraphs 8-17, 37-47, teaching the UE identifying overheating at the transceiver and/or the processor and in response, the UE sending an “UL control signal” that may indicate the overheating event as well as instructions to the BS to adjust communication parameters such as data rate ), wherein the overheating assistance information further includes information (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 31-42, teaching a process where the UE/terminal detects a beam failure on a SCELL#1/#2 or cell(i) among a plurality of SCELLs #n/cell(i)s [such beam failure teaching “triggering event”] and then in response to such beam failure, the UE sending to the BS a BFR-SR/BFRQ “on a dedicated PUCCH resource for BFR-SR transmission”; paragraph 41, disclosing, e.g., “a PUCCH resource for BFR-SR [scheduling request] transmission may be configured by the network via dedicated signaling” [such information on the PUCCH resource thus teaching “configuration information including multiple uplink transmission resources related to a triggering event”], thus teaching this limitation; further see paragraphs 142-146, further disclosing configuring BFR [beam failure recovery/request] parameters, all teaching the network/BS transmitting to the UE/terminal signaling containing information/configuration relating to resources for reporting beam-failure) Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated. Ye discloses information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate or include Ye’s radio resource information, as disclosed/taught by Ye’s teaching of “information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated”, in the overheating assistance information in Ljung, to reject “wherein the overheating assistance information includes information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated”. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 13, Ljung and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 12. Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated includes information about a slot and/or a symbol to which a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) is to be allocated. Ye discloses wherein the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated includes information about a slot and/or a symbol to which a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) is to be allocated. (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals; disclosing slot based allocation) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate and/or include Ye’s radio resource information in the overheating assistance information in Ljung. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 14, Ljung and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 12. Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated includes information about a slot and/or a symbol to which a tracking reference signal (TRS) is to be allocated. Ye discloses wherein the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated includes information about a slot and/or a symbol to which a tracking reference signal (TRS) is to be allocated. (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals; disclosing slot based allocation) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate Ye’s radio resource information in the overheating assistance information in Ljung. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 15, Ljung and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 12. Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to identify a reference signal from radio resources scheduled by the base station based on the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated. Ye discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to identify a reference signal from radio resources scheduled by the base station based on the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated. (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals; disclosing slot based allocation; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 73-78) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate Ye’s radio resource information in the overheating assistance information in Ljung. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 16, Ljung discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver (Figs. 1 and 2, disclosing UE and BS, including CPU, MEMory and transceivers, the BS teaching the apparatus here); and at least one processor configured to (Figs. 1 and 2, disclosing BS, including CPU, MEMory and transceivers) wirelessly receive, from a user equipment via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information generated based on overheating of the user equipment (Fig. 2, paragraphs 52-56: “the temperature at the interface 1022 and/or at the processor 1021 may rise above a certain threshold”; paragraphs 8-17, 37-47, teaching the UE identifying overheating at the transceiver and/or the processor and in response, the UE sending an “UL control signal” that may indicate the overheating event as well as instructions to the BS to adjust communication parameters such as data rate), and wirelessly transmit radio resources scheduled based on the overheating assistance information to the user equipment via the transceiver (Figs. 4-7, 13, disclosing that the UE receives subsequent data at the discontinuously processed level/rate), wherein the overheating assistance information further includes information (Figs. 1-3 and paragraphs 31-42, teaching a process where the UE/terminal detects a beam failure on a SCELL#1/#2 or cell(i) among a plurality of SCELLs #n/cell(i)s [such beam failure teaching “triggering event”] and then in response to such beam failure, the UE sending to the BS a BFR-SR/BFRQ “on a dedicated PUCCH resource for BFR-SR transmission”; paragraph 41, disclosing, e.g., “a PUCCH resource for BFR-SR [scheduling request] transmission may be configured by the network via dedicated signaling” [such information on the PUCCH resource thus teaching “configuration information including multiple uplink transmission resources related to a triggering event”], thus teaching this limitation; further see paragraphs 142-146, further disclosing configuring BFR [beam failure recovery/request] parameters, all teaching the network/BS transmitting to the UE/terminal signaling containing information/configuration relating to resources for reporting beam-failure) Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated. Ye discloses information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate or include Ye’s radio resource information, as disclosed/taught by Ye’s teaching of “information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated”, in the overheating assistance information in Ljung, to reject “wherein the overheating assistance information includes information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated”. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 17, Ljung and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 16. Ljung does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to identify at least one radio resource based on the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated, and allocate the reference signal for the user equipment to the identified at least one radio resource. Ye discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to identify at least one radio resource based on the information about a radio resource to which a reference signal is to be allocated, and allocate the reference signal for the user equipment to the identified at least one radio resource. (paragraph 77: information on resource elements allocated to demodulation reference signals, channel state information reference signals, phase tracking reference signals; Fig. 5 and paragraphs 73-78) Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ljung’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to incorporate Ye’s radio resource information in the overheating assistance information in Ljung. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ljung, paragraphs 1-19; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1,2,5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0176898 A1 to Ehsan et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0385804 A1 to Ye et al . As to claim 1, Ehsan discloses An apparatus, comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor configured to (Figs. 4-7, 9, disclosing User Equipment UE, teaching “apparatus” and recited components, in particular, Fig. 5, “modem subsystem”, teaches “transceiver”) identify overheating of the transceiver and/or the at least one processor (Figs. 4-7, 9, paragraphs 11-14, 62-66, 80-82, disclosing the UE identifying “high … modem temperature”, high “temperature of one or more devices at the UE including, for example, a modem and a batter”, teaching this limitation), and wirelessly transmit, to a base station via the transceiver, a message including overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating (Figs. 4-7, 9, paragraphs 11-14, 62-66, 80-82, disclosing the UE identifying “high … modem temperature”, high “temperature of one or more devices at the UE including, for example, a modem and a batter”, and in response, “the PDCP layer should increase the rate at which packets are dropped in an effort to reduce downlink flow. Consequently, UE TCP NACKs and/or duplicate acknowledgements may increase which may cause a reduction in TCP window size thereby providing downlink rate flow control”, thus teaching that the UE will send NACKs [the recited “a message including overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating”] to the base station sender for each packet dropped at the PDCP layer, teaching to a phosita that such NACKs will identify each packet dropped at the UE, the identification of the dropped packet teaching “overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating”, since the dropping of that packet will assist the UE in handling the overheating scenario ), and selectively process a data unit wirelessly received from the base station, based on the overheating assistance information (see discussion and citations above, where each packet determined to be dropped at the pdcp layer by the UE will be dropped, i.e., “selectively process[ed]”, wherein the identification of that packet is an embodiment of “overheating assistance information”). Ehsan does not appear to explicitly disclose “transport block”. Ye discloses transport block(s) (paragraphs 78-81: “transport block size (TBS)”, teaching “transport block(s)”). Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ehsan’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to recognize that Ehsan’s disclosed “data unit” could have been embodied or characterized by the “transport block(s)” disclosed in Ye, and thus Ye’s teaching of “transport block(s)” and Ehsan’s teaching of “selectively process a data unit wirelessly received from the base station, based on the overheating assistance information” may be combined to reject “selectively process a transport block wirelessly received from the base station, based on the overheating assistance information”. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ehsan, paragraphs 1-14; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. As to claim 2, Ehsan and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 1. Ehsan further discloses wherein the overheating assistance information includes information about radio resources to be discontinuously processed by the apparatus in a time domain (Figs. 4-7, 9, paragraphs 11-14, 62-66, 80-82, disclosing the UE identifying “high … modem temperature” will send NACKs [the recited “a message”] to the base station sender for each packet dropped by the UE at the PDCP layer, teaching to a phosita that such NACKs will identify each packet dropped at the UE, the identification of the dropped packet teaching “overheating assistance information based on the identified overheating”, since the dropping of that packet will assist the UE in handling the overheating scenario, and such “overheating assistance information” will identify the packet to be dropped, and subsequently re-transmitted by the sender’s TCP layer/mechanism, teaching “discontinuously processed by the apparatus in a time domain” ), wherein the at least one processor is further configured to identify radio resources based on mapping information included in higher layer signaling (Figs. 4-7, 9, paragraphs 11-14, 62-66, 80-82, disclosing the UE identifying “high … modem temperature” will determine/identify packets to be dropped at the PDCP layer, e.g., “PDCP packets greater than a predetermined size may be selectively dropped when the CFM 606 triggers downlink flow control”, thus teaching that a high(er) layer signaling would have instructed the UE to identify [“map[]”] PDCP packets larger than a predetermined size for dropping, teaching this limitation) and omit processing of radio resources exceeding the radio resources to be discontinuously processed, from among the identified radio resources (see discussion above, regarding identifying pDcP packets large enough for “dropping”, i.e., the recited “omitting”). As to claim 5, Ehsan and Ye teach the apparatus as in the parent claim 1. Ehsan further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to, until the overheating is not identified, wirelessly transmit a negative acknowledgement (NACK) to the base station via the transceiver and omit processing of a data unit received from the base station. (Figs. 4-7, 9, paragraphs 11-14, 62-66, 80-82, disclosing the UE identifying “high … modem temperature” will send NACKs [the recited “a message”] to the base station sender for each packet dropped by the UE at the PDCP layer, teaching this limitation to a phosita). Ehsan does not appear to explicitly disclose “transport block”. Ye discloses transport block(s) (paragraphs 78-81: “transport block size (TBS)”, teaching “transport block(s)”). Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize Ye’s teaching, in conjunction with Ehsan’s cited teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to recognize that Ehsan’s disclosed “data unit” could have been embodied or characterized by the “transport block(s)” disclosed in Ye, and thus Ye’s teaching of “transport block(s)” and Ehsan’s teaching of “omit processing of a data unit received from the base station” may be combined to reject “omit processing of a transport block received from the base station”. The cited references are in the same field of endeavor regarding wireless communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the robustness, efficiency, and flexibility of wireless control signaling. (Ehsan, paragraphs 1-14; Ye, paragraphs 1-9). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3,4,6 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 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM. 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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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. /CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 2 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 3 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 4 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 5 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 6 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 7 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 8 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 9 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 10 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 11 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 12 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 13 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 14 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 15 Art Unit: 2463 Application/Control Number: 18/797,062 Page 16 Art Unit: 2463
Prosecution Insights