Detail Action
This office action is a response to an application filed on 09/03/2024.
Claims 1-22 are pending for examination.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/03/2024. These drawings are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/03/2024 was filed. The submission 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 time wise 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- 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness- type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12114333 B2, 11606785 B2, 11838927 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the application are an obvious variant of the claims of the Patent. It is clear that all the elements of the application claim 1- 22 are to be found in patent claims and recite language that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize as substantially identical subject matter. The reasons for concluding that the invention defined in the independent claim 1 of application would have been an obvious variation to have modified by claim 1 of conflicting patent application, and thus, it is not patentably distinct from claims of the patent.
Instant Claim 1 of 18/823449
Conflicting Claim 1 of 12/114333
An integrated circuit to control a process for a terminal, the process comprising:
transmitting downlink control information and downlink data to a terminal; and
1 An integrated circuit to control a process for a terminal, the process comprising:
receiving downlink control information and downlink data
receiving a response signal, which is transmitted from the terminal using a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource determined based on the downlink control information and an offset,
wherein:
determining, based on the downlink control information and an offset, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource used for transmission of a response signal for the downlink data; and
transmitting the response signal using the determined PUCCH resource,
wherein:
a first offset is used as the offset when the terminal is configured in a coverage enhancement mode, in which the response signal is allowed to be transmitted repeatedly for one of plural repetition levels in a plurality of subframes, where the first offset is configured for each of the plural repetition levels; and
a first offset is used as the offset when the terminal is configured in a coverage enhancement mode, in which the response signal is allowed to be transmitted repeatedly for one of plural repetition levels in a plurality of subframes, where the first offset is configured for each of the plural repetition levels; and
the first offset is different from a second offset, which is used when the terminal is not configured in the coverage enhancement mode.
the first offset is different from a second offset, which is used when the terminal is not configured in the coverage enhancement mode.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1- 22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights