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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because: (1) The 1st sentence repeats information in the title (2) The word “wherein” is used twice (lines 5 and 7). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 13 and 14 are identical.
Applicant is advised that should claim 13 be found allowable, claim 14 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 18 - 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 3, 21, 21, 21 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12160864. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the above claims of the instant application are wholly contained in the corresponding claims of US 12160864, with differences noted as in the table below:
Instant application
US 12160864
Comments
Claim 1
Claim 1
A method, comprising: receiving, by a controller, a data demand of a terrestrial network of a terrestrial base station and a data demand of a satellite network of a satellite base station;
A method, comprising: receiving, by a controller, a data demand of a terrestrial network of a terrestrial base station and a data demand of a satellite network of a satellite base station;
generating, by the controller, a communication schedule comprising satellite resource block information of the satellite base station, wherein the satellite resource block information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the satellite base station is only allowed to use for wireless communication,
wherein the time and frequency blocks of terrestrial resource block information of the terrestrial base station do not overlap with the time and frequency blocks of the satellite resource block information;
generating, by the controller, a communication schedule which contains terrestrial resource block suppression information of the terrestrial base station and satellite resource block suppression information of the satellite base station,
wherein the terrestrial resource block suppression information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the terrestrial base station is to suppress wireless communications,
and the satellite resource block suppression information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the satellite base station is to suppress wireless communications;
Wherein if there is no overlap of time and frequency blocks of the satellite resource block information and terrestrial base station, it is inherent that suppression is occurring for either satellite or terrestrial, when the other is transmitting
and allocating, by the satellite base station, radio frequency (RF) resources based on the satellite resource block information.
and allocating, by the satellite base station, radio frequency (RF) resources based on the satellite resource block suppression information.
Suppression analyzed as above
Claim 18
Claim 21
A wireless system, comprising: a terrestrial base station, a satellite base station, and a controller; the controller configured to: receive a data demand of a terrestrial network of the terrestrial base station and a data demand of a satellite network of the satellite base station;
A wireless system, comprising: a terrestrial base station, a satellite base station, and a controller; the controller configured to: receive a data demand of a terrestrial network of the terrestrial base station and a data demand of a satellite network of the satellite base station;
and generate a communication schedule comprising satellite resource block information of the satellite base station,
wherein the satellite resource block information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the satellite base station is only allowed to use for wireless communication,
wherein the time and frequency blocks of terrestrial resource block information of the terrestrial base station do not overlap with the time and frequency blocks of the satellite resource block information;
and generate a communication schedule which contains terrestrial resource block suppression information of the terrestrial base station and satellite resource block suppression information of the satellite base station,
wherein the terrestrial resource block suppression information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the terrestrial base station is to suppress wireless communications,
and the satellite resource block suppression information indicates time and frequency blocks of the communication schedule that the satellite base station is to suppress wireless communications;
Wherein if there is no overlap of time and frequency blocks of the satellite resource block information and terrestrial base station, it is inherent that suppression is occurring for either satellite or terrestrial, when the other is transmitting
and the satellite base station configured to allocate radio frequency (RF) resources based on the satellite resource block information.
and the satellite base station configured to allocate radio frequency (RF) resources based on the satellite resource block suppression information.
Suppression analyzed as above
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 3, 5, 7 – 17 are 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.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to satellite/terrestrial base station resource block allocation:
Dutta et al. (US 11432367 B2) discloses methods and systems of self-organizing satellite-terrestrial networks.
Kang et al. (US 20160241328 A1) discloses apparatus and method for uplink power control of satellite and terrestrial integrated communication system.
Gormley et al. (US 20130315112 A1) discloses system and methods for cellular/satellite network coexistence.
Oh et al. (US 20110044237 A1) discloses method and apparatus for allocating traffic resources in multi-beam satellite communication system.
Yee et al. (US 20100039983 A1) discloses providing service in a satellite communications system to disadvantaged terminals.
Karabinis et al. (US 20060194576 A1) discloses Coordinated Satellite-Terrestrial Frequency Reuse.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 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 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights