DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
In response to the application filed on 09/19/2024, claims 1-15 are currently pending for the examination. The present application, filed on or after March 1wl16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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
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 1-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a shared radio frequency spectrum band that is shared between a first device that is configured to communicate using a first radio access technology (RAT) and a second device.” However, the claim does not specify the radio access technology according to which the second device communicates. Accordingly, it is unclear whether the second device communicates using the first RAT, a different RAT, or another communication technology. This ambiguity renders the scope of the claimed relationship between the first and second devices, including the subsequently recited selection of respective TxOP durations for communications in the shared spectrum band, unclear.
The claim further recites “identifying, by the second device, a first transmission opportunity (TxOP) duration associated with the first RAT.” It is unclear what constitutes a TxOP duration “associated with” a radio access technology. In particular, the claim does not make clear whether the first TxOP duration represents a TxOP duration actually used by the first device, a configured or signaled TxOP duration, a maximum permitted TxOP/channel occupancy duration, or another duration associated generally with the first RAT.
Because the subsequently recited second TxOP duration is selected “based on the first TxOP duration” and is required to be smaller than the first TxOP duration, the metes and bounds of the claimed first TxOP duration and corresponding comparative relationship are unclear.
After applying the broadest reasonable interpretation to the claim, this renders the scope of the claim ambiguous and leaves the metes and bounds of the claimed invention indeterminate. Thus, the claim is indefinite and should be rejected. It is recommended that the claim language be amended such that the exact meaning of the above quoted limitation is clear. Independent claims 11 and 17 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 2, based on the same/similar reason as discussed in above. Dependent claims 2-10, 12-16 and 18-20 are also rejected as being dependency upon the rejected base claims.
Dependent claims 2-15 are rejected for the reasons presented above with respect to the rejected claims and in view of their dependence thereon. It is recommended that the claim language be amended such that the exact meaning of the above quoted limitation is clear. For the purpose of examinations, Examiner will interpret the claims as best understood.
35 U.S.C. 112(f): Claim Interpretations
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.
Claim 11 recites "An apparatus means for identifying…and means for selecting", and thus the claim has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “means for” coupled with functional language “identifying and selecting…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
In view of the specification, the components of figure 5 are the device/apparatus that seems to perform the process of Wi-Fi device 505 to identify a first TxOP duration associated with the first RAT. For example, Wi-Fi device 505 may identify or otherwise determine the TxOP duration used by 5G device 510 based on one or more received signals, based on preconfigured information, based on information received from a base station, and the like. Accordingly, Wi-Fi device 505 may identify which TxOP duration that 5G device 510 (and other 5G devices) are using for 5G transmissions (e.g., C-V2X transmissions). In one non-limiting example, the TxOP duration for the 5G device 510 may be 500 microseconds, 1 millisecond, and the like. See ¶ [0104-0106].
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action. If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Loehr et al. (US 20200314819 A1 to discuss the method for Multiple RATs communications).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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.
/SAI AUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights