DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/814,727 filed on 8/26/2024. The preliminary amendment presented on 8/26/2024, which amends claims 1-21, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1-21 have been examined.
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 8/26/2024 and 2/3/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification is objected to because:
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.
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 1-21 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/811,841 (hereinafter Application ‘841). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Application ‘841 teaches as follows:
Applicant’s claims 1, 3, 6, and 9
Application ‘841’s claims 1, 5, and 7-8
An apparatus for channel state information feedback in a cellular communication network, the apparatus comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform:
An apparatus comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform (see, claim 1);
determining an optimal pair comprising a channel state information feedback size threshold defining a maximum number of bits for channel state information feedback, and a channel state information reference signal pattern, wherein the optimal pair is optimal for a user equipment;
obtaining a CSI-reference signal, CSI-RS, pattern and a CSI feedback size threshold, wherein the CSI-RS pattern and the CSI feedback size threshold are determined jointly (see, claim 1);
determining the CSI-RS pattern and the CSI feedback size threshold (see, claim 5);
assigning to the user equipment, based on the determined optimal pair and at least one of cell load information and cell performance information, a pair comprising a channel state information feedback size threshold defining a maximum number of bits for channel state information feedback and channel state information reference signal pattern; and
measuring a channel between the apparatus and the network node;
using a result of the measuring as a training data for the ML model; determining, utilizing the ML model and the training data, a plurality of CSI feedbacks, wherein each of the determined plurality of CSI feedbacks is associated with a corresponding CSI-RS pattern and CSI feedback size threshold pair;
comparing the determined plurality of CSI feedbacks; and
selecting CSI-RS pattern and CSI feedback size threshold pair based on the comparing (see, claim 7); and
transmitting, to the user equipment, information indicating the assigned pair.
receiving, from the network node, a CSI-RS pattern and a CSI feedback size threshold to be used for obtaining the CSI feedback to be transmitted to the network node (see, claim 8).
Therefore, Application ‘841 teaches similar limitations as presented above.
Rest of dependent claims 2 and 11-21, 4-5, 7-8, and 10 are rejected for the dependency on the rejected claims 1, 3, 6, and 9 respectively.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, Rebecca E Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2417
September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights