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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed on 08/16/2024 has a total of 20 claims pending in the application; there are 3 independent claims and 17 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The examiner suggests the title “a multicast service method used for wireless communication.”
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 1-20 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.
In claims 1, 8 and 13, applicant recites the acronym “HARQ-ACK”, without a corresponding meaning to the characters. Examiner suggest amending the phrase to recite, “Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request Acknowledgment (HARQ-ACK)” instead.
In claims 1-4, 8, 10-11, 13, 15 and 20, applicant recites the acronym “PUCCH” and “PUSCH” without a corresponding meaning to the characters. Examiner suggest amending the phrase to recite, “Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH)”, and “Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)” instead.
In claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 13 and 20, applicant recites the acronym “NACK”, without a corresponding meaning to the characters. Examiner suggest amending the phrase to recite, “Negative Acknowledgment (NACK)” instead.
The other dependent claims are also rejected since they depend on a rejected claim(s).
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,101,748 B2 [application No.17/563,057], Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the independent claims and their dependent claims of the instant application contain similar limitations of the independent and their dependent claims of the patented application, which lead to the same claimed invention, thus they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The independent claims and their dependent claims of the instant application contain similar limitations of the independent and their dependent claims of the co-pending application.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the language of the claims presented contain the same limitations claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the patented application to create the instant application.
Prior Art Made of Record
The following is a related prior art made of record, found from the search and considered relevant to applicant’s disclosure but does not teach the claimed limitations as detailed by applicant:
- Line et al (US 2021/0068125 A1), teaches a user equipment receiving configuration information of a scheduled mode sidelink resource pool from a base station, the configuration information from the base station comprising at least one of a resource reservation interval, or a length of contiguous sub-channels, and performing sensing in the scheduled mode sidelink resource pool and reporting the sensing result, wherein the sensing result is associated with a set of available resources of the scheduled mode sidelink resource pool.
- Zhang et al (US 2021/0258921 A1), teaches a first terminal device determines a first parameter indicating a parameter of a sensing window, a parameter of a resource selection window, and/or a parameter of a first time window, and the first time window includes the sensing window and the resource selection window. The first terminal device determines a first resource pool from at least one resource pool based on the first parameter. The first terminal device selects a first resource from the first resource pool. The first terminal device transmits sidelink information on the first resource, thus, a data transmission delay can be reduced and system communication efficiency can be improved.
- Park et al (US 2021/0014893 A1), teaches a first base station receives resource information from one or more wireless devices. The first base station determines, based on the resource information, combined resource information associated with a first cell. The combined resource information comprises a combined channel busy ratio of a sidelink resource pool. The first base station sends, to a second base station, an information message comprising the combined resource information. The first base station receives, from the second base station, a request message requesting a resource configuration of the first cell for a wireless device. The request message is based on the information message.
Conclusion
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111 (c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELNABI O MUSA whose telephone number is (571)270-1901, and email address is abdelnabi.musa@uspto.gov ‘preferred’. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Bates, can be reached on 571-2723980. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system? Contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDELNABI O MUSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights