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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 4 are presented for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120 is acknowledged.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/112654, filed on06/21/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/02/2024 was received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 2 and 3 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the first exchange cell stream". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation " the second exchange cell stream ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the first subset". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the second subset". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 – 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,213 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 12,143,213
A transmission device comprising:
A transmission device comprising:
a processor that, in operation, performs error correction coding to generate a first codeword and a second codeword;
to perform error correction coding and mapping on the first frames to generate first cells consisting of a first initial cell and first remaining cells following the first initial cell; to perform error correction coding and mapping on the second frames to generate second cells consisting of a second initial cell and second remaining cells following the second initial cell, and
generates a first symbol sequence from the first codeword and a second symbol sequence from the second codeword; and
exchanges a first subset of the first symbols with a second subset of the second symbols to generate a first exchanged symbol sequence and a second exchanged symbol sequence; and
to exchange a first subset of the first cells with a second subset of the second cells to generate a first exchanged cell stream and a second exchanged cell stream; and
a transmitter connected to the processor that, in operation, transmit the first exchanged symbol sequence in a first frequency band and the second exchanged symbol sequence in a second frequency band.
a transmitter connected to the processor to transmit the first exchanged cell stream in a first frequency band, and transmit the second exchanged cell stream in a second frequency band, wherein the first subset includes the first initial cell and the second subset includes the second initial cell.
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 12,143,213. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 12,143,213 discloses: A transmission device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the transmission device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 12,143,213. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the transmission device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 12,143,213, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 2 – Application 18/904365
Claim 2 – Patent 12,143,213
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 3 – Patent 12,143,213
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 12,143,213
Claims 1, 3, and 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,632,192 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 11,632,192. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 11,632,192 discloses: A transmission device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the transmission device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 11,632,192. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the transmission device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 11,632,192, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,632,192
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,632,192
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,632,192
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,075,714 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 11,075,714. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 11,075,714 discloses: A device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the reception device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 11,075,714. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the reception device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 11,075,714, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,075,714
Claim 2 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,075,714
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,075,714
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 11,075,714
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 – 3 of U.S. Patent No. 10,693,588 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 10,693,588. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 10,693,588 discloses: A transmission device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the transmission device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 10,693,588. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the transmission device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 10,693,588, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 2 – Application 18/904365
Claim 2 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 3 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 1 – Patent 10,693,588
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 2 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 10,666,385 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 10,666,385. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 10,666,385 discloses: A transmission device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the transmission device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 10,666,385. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the transmission device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 10,693,588, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 2 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 2 – Application 18/904365
Claim 5 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 2 – Patent 10,693,588
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 2 – Patent 10,693,588
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 8, 13 ,and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,258,083 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/904365 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 9,258,083. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, and claim 1, of patent 9,258,083 discloses: A transmission device, comprising such steps as “error correction coding”, generating symbol sequences (mapping), and a transmitter connected to the processor.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the transmission device disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 9,258,083. A device performing the operations and a device capable of performing the disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the transmission device of claim 1, of the current application 18/904365, as performing the operations of the transmission device of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 9,258,083, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/904365
Claim 8 – Patent 9,258,083
Claim 2 – Application 18/904365
Claim 17 – Patent 9,258,083
Claim 3 – Application 18/904365
Claim 13 – Patent 9,258,083
Claim 4 – Application 18/904365
Claim 8 – Patent 9,258,083
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a0(1) as being anticipated by Roh et al., U.S. Publication 2011/0033001 (herein Roh).
Regarding claim 1, Roh discloses: A transmission device (figure 5B) comprising: a processor that, in operation, performs error correction coding to generate a first codeword and a second codeword (paragraph 0084; figure 5B, element “codeword 1”, “Codeword 2”); generates a first symbol sequence from the first codeword and a second symbol sequence from the second codeword (paragraph 0116); and exchanges a first subset of the first symbols with a second subset of the second symbols to generate a first exchanged symbol sequence and a second exchanged symbol sequence (figure 5B, element “Stream antenna mapping”; paragraph 0298 – 300; table 24); and a transmitter connected to the processor that, in operation, transmit the first exchanged symbol sequence in a first frequency band and the second exchanged symbol sequence in a second frequency band (figure 5B, element 1, 2).
Regarding claim 2, Roh discloses: the transmitter comprises a single antenna through which the first exchanged cell stream and the second exchanged cell stream are to be transmitted (figure 5B, element i “Antenna 1”).
Regarding claim 3, Roh discloses: the first symbol sequence includes a first initial symbol and first remaining symbols following the first initial symbol, the second symbol sequence includes a second initial symbol and second remaining symbols following the second initial symbol, the first subset includes the first initial symbol, and the second subset includes the second initial symbol (figure 5B, element “Stream antenna mapping”; paragraph 0298 – 300; table 24).
Regarding claim 4, Roh discloses: A transmission method performed by a transmission device (figure 5B), the transmission method comprising: performing error correction coding to generate a first codeword and a second codeword (paragraph 0084; figure 5B, element “codeword 1”, “Codeword 2”); generating a first symbol sequence from the first codeword and a second symbol sequence from the second codeword (paragraph 0116); and exchanging a first subset of the first symbols with a second subset of the second symbols to generate a first exchanged symbol sequence and a second exchanged symbol sequence (figure 5B, element “Stream antenna mapping”; paragraph 0298 – 300; table 24); and transmitting the first exchanged symbol sequence in a first frequency band and the second exchanged symbol sequence in a second frequency band (figure 5B, element 1, 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Moon; Sangchul et al. US 20130272448 A1
PICCHI; Ottavio et al. US 20110307766 A1
Cheng; Jung-Fu et al. US 20110274062 A1
Liu; Jin et al. US 20110107174 A1
Measson; Cyril et al. US 20110085620 A1
exchanges a first subset of the first symbols with a second subset of the second symbols to generate a first exchanged symbol sequence and asecond exchanged symbol sequence; and
a transmitter connected to the processor that, in operation, transmit the first exchanged symbol sequence in a first frequency band and the second exchanged symbol sequence in a second frequency band.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL F MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am - 5pm 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, Mark Featherstone can be reached at (571)270-3750. 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.
/Daniel F. McMahon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2111