DETAILED ACTION
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
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 21-24 and 26-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8, 11, 13 and 15-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12096199. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application is anticipated by the cited patent.
Instant Application
US 12096199
21. A device, comprising: a controller configured to receive information indicative of a first clock signal corresponding to a first link, and based on the first clock signal, cause adjustment to a second clock signal for a second link so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link begins a calculated interval after a corresponding transmission on the first link.
15. A first device, comprising: an antenna configured to eavesdrop information comprising a reference clock signal transmitted from a master device to a second device over a first link; and a controller configured to execute instructions for, based on the reference clock signal, adjusting a first clock signal for a second link between the first device and the second device so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link follows a corresponding transmission on the first link by a predetermined interval.
22. The device of claim 21, wherein the controller is configured to calculate the interval based on a difference between the first clock signal and the second clock signal.
16. The first device of claim 15, wherein: the antenna is further configured to receive the reference clock signal from the master device; and the controller is further configured to: calculate a change for the first clock signal based on a difference between the first clock signal and the reference clock signal.
23. The device of claim 21, wherein the controller is configured to jam an ACK signal transmitted via the first link by transmitting a NACK signal at a time determined by the adjusted second clock signal.
17. The first device of claim 15, wherein the first device is further configured to: adjust the first clock signal based on a difference between the first clock signal and the reference clock signal; and jam an ACK signal transmitted by the second device by transmitting a NACK signal at a time determined by the adjusted first clock signal.
24. The device of claim 21, wherein the controller is configured to receive the information indicative of the first clock signal via an eavesdropping at times determined by the first clock signal information.
15. A first device, comprising: an antenna configured to eavesdrop information comprising a reference clock signal transmitted from a master device to a second device over a first link; and a controller configured to execute instructions for, based on the reference clock signal, adjusting a first clock signal for a second link between the first device and the second device so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link follows a corresponding transmission on the first link by a predetermined interval.
26. A method comprising: receiving information indicative of a first clock signal of a first link; based on the first clock signal, causing an adjustment to a second clock signal of a second link so that each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link begins a calculated interval after a corresponding transmission on the first link.
8. A method, comprising: at a first device, communicating with a master device over a first link; at a second device, eavesdropping information comprising a reference clock signal transmitted from the master device to the first device; and based on the reference clock signal, adjusting at least one of a first clock signal for the first link and a second clock signal for a second link between the second device and the first device so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link follows a corresponding transmission on the first link by a predetermined interval.
27. The method of claim 26, wherein causing the adjustment includes calculating the interval based on a difference between the first clock signal and the second clock signal.
11. The method of claim 8, further comprising: calculating a change for the first clock signal based on a first difference between the first clock signal and the reference clock signal; and calculating a change for the second clock signal based on a second difference between the second clock signal and the reference clock signal.
28. The method of claim 26, further comprising jamming an ACK signal transmitted via the first link by transmitting a NACK signal at a time determined by the adjusted second clock signal.
13. The method of claim 8, further comprising, at the second device: adjusting the second clock signal based on a difference between the second clock signal and the reference clock signal; and jamming an ACK signal transmitted by the first device by transmitting a NACK signal at a time determined by the adjusted second clock signal.
29. The method of claim 26, comprising determine a timing for a communication via the second link based on the first clock signal and the adjusted second clock signal.
8. A method, comprising: at a first device, communicating with a master device over a first link; at a second device, eavesdropping information comprising a reference clock signal transmitted from the master device to the first device; and based on the reference clock signal, adjusting at least one of a first clock signal for the first link and a second clock signal for a second link between the second device and the first device so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link follows a corresponding transmission on the first link by a predetermined interval.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 21, 22, 25-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newham et al. (US 2014/0029701 A1), hereinafter “Newham.”
As to claim 21, Newham discloses a device (Fig. 1):
configured to receive information indicative of a first clock signal corresponding to a first link (¶0056-0057, Fig. 1. “The encoded audio data may be received by a wireless receiver node (e.g., left earpiece) and decoded at rates synchronized with respect to a first local clock domain based on clock signal included in the wireless transmissions. Such synchronizing may enable the wireless nodes to compensate for any clock drift that occurs between the source node clock domain (e.g., cell phone clock domain) and the first local clock domain in the receiving wireless node (e.g., left earpiece). This embodiment may be extended to system implementations in which audio data is transmitted from the source node (e.g., a cell phone) to a first wireless node (e.g., the left earpiece), which then sends at least a portion (e.g., the right channel) of the audio data to the second wireless node (e.g., the right earpiece). By encoding the second channel data transmitted from the first wireless node to the second wireless done with respect to the domain clock signal, the rendering of audio in the second wireless node can be synchronized that of the first wireless node within the required tolerances.”), and
based on the first clock signal, cause adjustment to a second clock signal for a second link so each of a plurality of periodic transmissions on the second link begins a calculated interval after a corresponding transmission on the first link (¶0056-0057, Fig. 1. “This embodiment may be extended to system implementations in which audio data is transmitted from the source node (e.g., a cell phone) to a first wireless node (e.g., the left earpiece), which then sends at least a portion (e.g., the right channel) of the audio data to the second wireless node (e.g., the right earpiece). By encoding the second channel data transmitted from the first wireless node to the second wireless done with respect to the domain clock signal, the rendering of audio in the second wireless node can be synchronized that of the first wireless node within the required tolerances.” “The signals must be sufficiently spaced to create an intended stereo or surround sound effect, but not so much that the signal delays are recognizable to human ears.”).
Newham does not expressly disclose a controller.
However, a wireless headphones having controller/processor is well known, routine and conventional in the art. The wireless earphone having a controller/processor for processing is applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable results.
As to claim 22, Newham discloses wherein the controller is configured to calculate the interval based on a difference between the first clock signal and the second clock signal (¶0056-0057, Fig. 1. “Such synchronizing may enable the wireless nodes to compensate for any clock drift that occurs between the source node clock domain (e.g., cell phone clock domain) and the first local clock domain in the receiving wireless node (e.g., left earpiece).” “The data may be sent from the first wireless node to the second wireless receiver (e.g., left earpiece) and decoded at variable rates with respect to the domain clock or to the local clock of the first wireless node domain, in a manner that compensates for any clock drift that occurs between the first and second local clock domains.”).
As to claim 25, Newham discloses wherein the device is configured to determine a timing for communication via the second link based on the first clock signal and the adjusted second clock signal (¶0056-0057, Fig. 1. “Such synchronizing may enable the wireless nodes to compensate for any clock drift that occurs between the source node clock domain (e.g., cell phone clock domain) and the first local clock domain in the receiving wireless node (e.g., left earpiece).” “The data may be sent from the first wireless node to the second wireless receiver (e.g., left earpiece) and decoded at variable rates with respect to the domain clock or to the local clock of the first wireless node domain, in a manner that compensates for any clock drift that occurs between the first and second local clock domains.”).
Claim 26 is directed towards substantially the same subject matter as claim 21 and is therefore rejected using the same motivation as claim 21 above.
Claims 27 and 30 are rejected under claim 26 using the same motivation as claims 22 and 25 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K MOONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM -5:00 PM EST.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 5712727848. 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.
/JAMES K MOONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights