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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/4/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner has thoroughly reviewed Applicant’s arguments but firmly believes that the cited reference reasonably and properly meet the claimed limitation as rejected.
Applicant’s argument -- The applicant disagrees with the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection.
Examiner’s response -- Claims 1-3, 7-11, 15-16, 18-20, 24, and 27-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claims 1, 27 and 28 recite: “receiving, receiving, acquiring, determining and feeding back” information. This is mental process including observations, evaluations, judgements, and opinions. A person can receive information. Acquiring is a broad term, and it merely means collecting/obtaining (information). A person also can send back information. Claimed parameters “N, K, M, and M1” represent pieces of information. The steps are not direct to a specific technological improvement in wireless communications. Claimed “communication node” is merely a generic element. The generic computer functions do not add
meaningful limitation to the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitations amount to no more than
the abstract idea of generating data. Claim 18 recites: “sending and receiving” information, which is also mental process. A person with aid of head, hand or paper can send information.
Applicant’s argument of “the claimed steps directly improve radio resource management and transmission efficiency. The output is used to control physical transmission parameters, such as modulation and coding schemes or beam selection” do not reflect in claims. There is no steps to reflect any of the improvements asserted by the applicant. The Examiner also disagree with the Applicant’s argument of “the first communication node's operations involve domain-specific wireless processing-including reference signal reception, channel estimation, and CSI derivation-that are inherently technical and telecommunications-specific”. The claims merely directed to receiving, collecting, and sending back information. There are no indications of any technical and telecommunications specific. Therefore, claims are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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 1-3, 7-11, 15-16, 18-20, 24, and 27-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claims 1, 27 and 28 recite: “receiving, receiving, acquiring, determining and feeding back” information. This is mental process including observations, evaluations, judgements, and opinions. A person can receive information. Acquiring is a broad term, and it merely means collecting/obtaining (information). A person also can send back information. Claimed parameters “N, K, M, and M1” represent pieces of information. Claim 18 recites: “sending and receiving” information, which is also mental process. A person with aid of head, hand or paper can send information. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “communication node, memory, processor and non-transitory storage medium” is a generic computer element and each step does no more than require a generic computer to perform generic computer functions. The generic computer functions do not add meaningful limitation to the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitations amount to no more than the abstract idea of generating data.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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). September 9, 2026
/EVA Y PUENTE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights