DETAILED ACTION
Status of Case
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 11/5/2025.
Claims 7-11 are pending with claims 1-6 being cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 9/4/2024 and 3/11/2026 have been considered by Examiner.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are “a reception section” and “a control section” in claim 7 and “a control section” and “a transmission section” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini (USPAN 2022/0182130) in view of Islam (USPAN 2022/0311503).
Consider claims 7 and 11, Abedini discloses a repeater (see figure 3, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said repeater element 204), and a corresponding communication method (see paragraph 150, wherein disclosed is said method), comprising:
a reception section that receives beam identification information via a radio resource control message (see paragraph 150: RU unit 320 within the repeater 204 can use multiple TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, wherein each of the multiple TDD patterns can be determined by the DU or CU within the base station 102, and each of the multiple TDD patterns can be indicated using a message that can be sent as an RRC message or MAC-CE); and
a control section that determines a beam of a signal to be forwarded, based on the beam identification information (see paragraph 150: the repeater 204 uses the TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, and each TDD pattern can be associated with a cell identifier, TRP identifier, or beam identifier), wherein
the reception section receives control information via a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer (see paragraph 150: the repeater can receive said data via a MAC-CE message).
PNG
media_image1.png
554
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Abedini does not specifically disclose that a control section changes the beam of the signal based on beam identification information included in control information.
Islam discloses that a control section changes the beam of the signal based on beam identification information included in control information (see figure 4, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said changing of the beam, which would require said beam identification information in order to change the beam; also, see paragraphs 13, 15, and 19: the beam change instruction is included in a MAC-CE message or a RRC signal).
PNG
media_image2.png
728
466
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Abedini and combine it with the noted teachings of Islam. The motivation to combine these references is to provide a method for relaying data using a repeater and performing a beam change operation in an efficient manner (see paragraphs 4-9 of Islam).
Consider claim 9, Abedini discloses a base station (see figure 3, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said base station 102), comprising:
a control section that determines beam identification information related to a beam for a repeater to forward a signal; and a transmission section that transmits the beam identification information to the repeater via a radio resource control message (see paragraph 150: RU unit 320 within the repeater 204 can use multiple TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, wherein each of the multiple TDD patterns can be determined by the DU or CU within the base station 102, and each of the multiple TDD patterns can be indicated using a message that can be sent as an RRC message or MAC-CE); wherein
the transmission section transmits control information including beam identification information, to the repeater via a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer (see paragraph 150: the repeater can receive said data via a MAC-CE message).
PNG
media_image1.png
554
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Abedini does not specifically disclose that a control section determines to change the beam.
Islam discloses that a control section determines to change the beam (see figure 4, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said changing of the beam, which would require said beam identification information in order to change the beam; also, see paragraphs 13, 15, and 19: the beam change instruction is included in a MAC-CE message or a RRC signal).
PNG
media_image2.png
728
466
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Abedini and combine it with the noted teachings of Islam. The motivation to combine these references is to provide a method for relaying data using a repeater and performing a beam change operation in an efficient manner (see paragraphs 4-9 of Islam).
Consider claim 10, Abedini discloses a radio system, comprising: a base station; and a repeater (see figure 3, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said radio system comprising said base station 102 and said repeater 204),
the base station including:
a control section that determines beam identification information related to a beam for a repeater to forward a signal; and a transmission section that transmits the beam identification information to the repeater via a radio resource control message (see paragraph 150: RU unit 320 within the repeater 204 can use multiple TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, wherein each of the multiple TDD patterns can be determined by the DU or CU within the base station 102, and each of the multiple TDD patterns can be indicated using a message that can be sent as an RRC message or MAC-CE); wherein
the transmission section transmits control information including beam identification information, to the repeater via a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer (see paragraph 150: the repeater can receive said data via a MAC-CE message).
the repeater including:
a reception section that receives beam identification information via a radio resource control message (see paragraph 150: RU unit 320 within the repeater 204 can use multiple TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, wherein each of the multiple TDD patterns can be determined by the DU or CU within the base station 102, and each of the multiple TDD patterns can be indicated using a message that can be sent as an RRC message or MAC-CE); and
a control section that determines a beam of a signal to be forwarded, based on the beam identification information (see paragraph 150: the repeater 204 uses the TDD patterns to determine the repeater function, and each TDD pattern can be associated with a cell identifier, TRP identifier, or beam identifier), wherein
the reception section receives control information via a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer (see paragraph 150: the repeater can receive said data via a MAC-CE message).
Abedini does not specifically disclose that a control section determines to change the beam.
Islam discloses that a control section determines to change the beam (see figure 4, reproduced below for convenience, wherein disclosed is said changing of the beam, which would require said beam identification information in order to change the beam; also, see paragraphs 13, 15, and 19: the beam change instruction is included in a MAC-CE message or a RRC signal).
PNG
media_image2.png
728
466
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Abedini and combine it with the noted teachings of Islam. The motivation to combine these references is to provide a method for relaying data using a repeater and performing a beam change operation in an efficient manner (see paragraphs 4-9 of Islam).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamal Javaid whose telephone number is 571-270-5137 and email address is Jamal.Javaid@uspto.gov.
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 Jiang, can be reached on 571-270-7191. 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).
/JAMAL JAVAID/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights