DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 4, please delete: “possibly” before “L”.
On line 7, please delete: “the” before “incremental”, and add -- an --.
On line 19, please add: -- the -- before “at least wo antennas”.
On line 26, please add: -- of the message -- after “the second redundancy”.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 3, please delete: “the” before “global”, and add -- a --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Regarding claim 1: a) On line 10, recitation: “which it” is unclear what it refers to.
b) On line 16, recitation: “a source si” is unclear and confusing if this is the same as “at least one si”.
c) On line 19, recitation: “the at least two nodes” is unclear and confusing if this refers to a part of N nodes or “at least one first node and one second node”.
d) On line 21, recitation: “the first set” is unclear and confusing. Regarding claim 4:
a) On line 2, recitation: “the precoding coefficient” is unclear and confusing if this is referring to the first precoding coefficient, the second precoding coefficient, or both.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2006/0239222 Kim et al disclose MIMO transmission and retransmission with decoding error detection. US 8,509,288 Erkip et al disclose multiplexing with relays and coding.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eva Y Puente whose telephone number is 571-272-3049. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chieh Fan can be reached on 571-272-3042. 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). March 13, 2026
/EVA Y PUENTE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights