CTNF 18/835,521 CTNF 84724 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-01-aia AIA 07-03-01-r-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claims 1-14 are currently pending. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1, 3, 9, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: Please enclose acronyms mentioned a first time in the claims in parenthesis . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Please remove referenced numbers from the claims . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 7-8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 7 recites a computer program which is not stored in a non-transitory medium; thus this claim covers a software per se. Claim 8 recites a carrier which is one of an electronic signal, an optical signal, an electromagnetic signal, a magnetic signal, an electric signal, a radio signal, a microwave signal, or a computer- readable storage medium; thus this claim covers transitory propagating signals. See MPEP 2111.01. When a claim covers a signal and software per se , the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2. 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wijting et al. (US 20100202305 A1) in view of Lei et al. (US 20200146055 A1) . Regarding claim 1 , Wijting et al. disclose a method performed by a network node, for scheduling one or more User Equipments, UEs, in respective upcoming data transmissions in a wireless communications network, the method comprising: scheduling a first UE over at least a part of one first cell, for an upcoming first data transmission (paragraphs [0059-0060]; scheduling resources for user terminals in the lending cell and the neighboring cells based on minimizing interference between the user terminals and the borrowed spectral resources and scheduling resources for user terminals in the lending cell and the neighboring cells based on priority class of the user terminals) , which first cell comprises overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the first cell and enabled to be used by at least one second cell (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) , wherein the overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the first cell and the at least one second cell, and wherein each scheduling in the first cell is associated with a processing resource cost and a radio resource cost for scheduling (paragraphs [0037-0038]; user terminals of the cells (lending cell, borrowing cell, neighboring cell) are served based on spectral resources in terms of cost, priority class, traffic type, and how long) (paragraphs [0048-0049]; scheduling user terminals within spectral resources, priority class, channel quality) . However, Wijting et al. may not explicitly suggest that the overlapping carrier spectrum are controlled by the same network node. Lei et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest the overlapping carrier spectrum used by first cell and second cell are controlled by the same network node (paragraph [0066]; different geographic coverage areas (cells/sectors) associated with different technologies may overlap, and overlapping geographic coverage areas associated with different technologies may be supported by the same base station) . Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Wijting et al.’s method/system where the overlapping carrier spectrum are controlled by the same network node as suggested by Lei et al. to provide access for different types of devices. The motivation would have been to reduce latency, improve spectral efficiency or reduce conflicts between UEs (paragraph [0004]). Regarding claim 2 , Wijting et al. further suggest scheduling a second UE over at least a part of one second cell, for an upcoming second data transmission, which second cell comprises the overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the second cell and by at least the first cell, and wherein each scheduling in the second cell is associated to a processing resource cost and a radio resource cost for scheduling (paragraphs [0037-0038]; user terminals of the cells (lending cell, borrowing cell, neighboring cell) are served based on spectral resources in terms of cost, priority class, traffic type, and how long) (paragraphs [0048-0049]; scheduling user terminals within spectral resources, priority class, channel quality) (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) . Regarding claim 3 , Lei et al. further suggest wherein the first cell is associated to one Physical Downlink Control Channel, PDCCH, and/or the second cell is associated to one PDCCH (paragraphs [0089] [0091]) . Regarding claim 4 , Wijting et al. further suggest wherein the overlapping carrier spectrum is used by any one or more out of: the first UE in the first cell, the second UE in the second cell, and by one or more third UEs in a respective third cell (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) . Regarding claim 5 , Lei et al. further suggest wherein the overlapping carrier spectra of any of the respective first cell, second cell, and third cells, are not orthogonal spectrum resources in relation to each other (paragraph [0006]; base station of the wireless communication system may support non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) techniques, where communications with different UEs may occur using non-orthogonal communication resources (e.g., overlapping portions of a radio frequency spectrum band during overlapping time intervals)) . Regarding claim 6 , Lei et al. further suggest comprising: deciding whether or not to set up the first UE to carrier aggregation over another cell in the overlapping carrier spectrum, and/or deciding whether or not to set up the second UE to carrier aggregation over another cell in the overlapping carrier spectrum (paragraph [0095]; UE may be configured with multiple downlink component carriers and one or more uplink component carriers according to a carrier aggregation configuration) . Regarding claim 7 , Wijting et al. further suggest computer program comprising instructions, which when executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform actions according to claim 1 (paragraph [0080]) . Regarding claim 8 , Wijting et al. further suggest a carrier comprising the computer program of claim 7, wherein the carrier is one of an electronic signal, an optical signal, an electromagnetic signal, a magnetic signal, an electric signal, a radio signal, a microwave signal, or a computer- readable storage medium (paragraph [0082]) . Regarding claim 9 , Wijting et al. disclose a network node configured to schedule one or more User Equipments, UEs, in respective upcoming data transmissions in a wireless communications network, the network node further being configured to: schedule a first UE over at least a part of one first cell for an upcoming first data transmission (paragraphs [0059-0060]; scheduling resources for user terminals in the lending cell and the neighboring cells based on minimizing interference between the user terminals and the borrowed spectral resources and scheduling resources for user terminals in the lending cell and the neighboring cells based on priority class of the user terminals) , which first cell is adapted to comprise overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the first cell and enabled to be used by at least one second cell (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) , wherein the overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the first cell and the at least one second cell, and wherein each scheduling in the first cell is adapted to be associated with a processing resource cost and a radio resource cost for scheduling (paragraphs [0037-0038]; user terminals of the cells (lending cell, borrowing cell, neighboring cell) are served based on spectral resources in terms of cost, priority class, traffic type, and how long) (paragraphs [0048-0049]; scheduling user terminals within spectral resources, priority class, channel quality) . However, Wijting et al. may not explicitly suggest that the overlapping carrier spectrum are controlled by the same network node. Lei et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor suggest the overlapping carrier spectrum used by first cell and second cell are controlled by the same network node (paragraph [0066]; different geographic coverage areas (cells/sectors) associated with different technologies may overlap, and overlapping geographic coverage areas associated with different technologies may be supported by the same base station) . Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate in Wijting et al.’s method/system where the overlapping carrier spectrum are controlled by the same network node as suggested by Lei et al. to provide access for different types of devices. The motivation would have been to reduce latency, improve spectral efficiency or reduce conflicts between UEs (paragraph [0004]). Regarding claim 10 , Wijting et al. further suggest schedule a second UE over at least a part of one second cell, for an upcoming second data transmission, which second cell comprises the overlapping carrier spectrum to be used by the second cell and by at least the first cell, and wherein each scheduling in the second cell is associated to a processing resource cost and a radio resource cost for scheduling (paragraphs [0037-0038]; user terminals of the cells (lending cell, borrowing cell, neighboring cell) are served based on spectral resources in terms of cost, priority class, traffic type, and how long) (paragraphs [0048-0049]; scheduling user terminals within spectral resources, priority class, channel quality) (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) . Regarding claim 11 , Lei et al. further suggest wherein the first cell is associated to one Physical Downlink Control Channel, PDCCH, and/or the second cell is associated to one PDCCH (paragraphs [0089] [0091]) . Regarding claim 12 , Wijting et al. further suggest wherein the overlapping carrier spectrum is used by any one or more out of: the first UE in the first cell, the second UE in the second cell, and by one or more third UEs in a respective third cell (paragraph [0037]; spectrum desired by the cell may overlap with the spectrum used by neighboring cell) . Regarding claim 13 , Lei et al. further suggest wherein the overlapping carrier spectra of any of the respective first cell, second cell, and third cells, are not orthogonal spectrum resources in relation to each other (paragraph [0006]; base station of the wireless communication system may support non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) techniques, where communications with different UEs may occur using non-orthogonal communication resources (e.g., overlapping portions of a radio frequency spectrum band during overlapping time intervals)) . Regarding claim 14 , Lei et al. further suggest comprising: deciding whether or not to set up the first UE to carrier aggregation over another cell in the overlapping carrier spectrum, and/or deciding whether or not to set up the second UE to carrier aggregation over another cell in the overlapping carrier spectrum (paragraph [0095]; UE may be configured with multiple downlink component carriers and one or more uplink component carriers according to a carrier aggregation configuration) . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOANG-CHUONG Q VU whose telephone number is (571)270-3945. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30-5:30 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, AYAZ SHEIKH can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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. HOANG-CHUONG Q. VU Primary Examiner Art Unit 2476 /HOANG-CHUONG Q VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 2 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 3 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 4 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 5 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 6 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 7 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 8 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 9 Art Unit: 2476 Application/Control Number: 18/835,521 Page 10 Art Unit: 2476
Prosecution Insights