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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on 13 November 2024.
Claims 1-20 are under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10 June 2026, 12 March 2026, and 02 December 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,177,897. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims are broader in every aspect than the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,177,897 and is therefore an obvious variant thereof.
Claims 1, 9, and 17 of the instant application is directed to An apparatus, comprising: a processor configured to, when executing instructions stored in a memory, perform operations comprising: receiving one or more synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) on one or more receive beams as part of a measurement procedure with listen before talk (LBT); determining one or more synchronization signal block (SSB) based radio resource measurement (RRM) timing configuration windows (SMTCs) are not available in a user equipment (UE) measurement period; determining, in response to determining the one or more SMTCs are not available in the UE measurement period, a measurement period based on a baseline measurement period, a carrier-specific scaling factor value, a SMTC periodicity value, a UE receive (Rx) beam sweeping factor, and a value based on the one or more SMTCs not being available in a UE measurement period; and performing measurements using the determined measurement period.
Claim 1, 9, and 17 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,177,897 is directed to A processor, comprising: memory storing instructions that, when executed, cause a user equipment (UE) to: receive one or more synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) on one or more receive beams as part of a measurement procedure with listen before talk (LBT); determine one or more synchronization signal block (SSB) based radio resource measurement (RRM) timing configuration windows (SMTCs) are not available in a UE measurement period; select, in response to determining the one or more SMTCs are not available in the UE measurement period, a measurement period based on a sum of a first term and a second term, wherein the first term is a baseline measurement period and the second term is a product of a plurality of values including a carrier-specific scaling factor value, a SMTC periodicity value, a UE receive (Rx) beam sweeping factor, and a value based on the one or more SMTCs not being available in a UE measurement period; and perform measurements using the selected measurement period.
Claims 1, 9, and 17 of the present application merely broaden the scope of independent Claim 1, 9, and 17 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,177,897 by eliminating a measurement period based on a sum of a first term and a second term
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 and 18-20 of instant application are duplicates of 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,177,897.
It has been held that the omission an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same as before. In Re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also, note Ex Parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd.App. 1969); omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one skilled in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cui et al. (US Publication 2023/0269654) discloses e cell may not provide signals (such as the synchronization signals and/or the MIB) for the cell detection/measurement and T/F tracking procedure 102 and/or the MIB acquisition stage 104 based on an LBT failure occurring on SSB transmission. Further, the cell may not provide the signals (such as the PDCCH transmission scheduling the SIB1, the PDSCH that carriers, and/or the MIB) for the SIB1 acquisition.
Awad et al. (US Publication 2021/0195544) discloses detecting a plurality of beams of radio signals each being transmitted periodically according to a time divided structure of a wireless access interface provided by a wireless communications network, selecting a first of the plurality of beams of radio signals for detecting a first version of a synchronization signal transmitted with the first beam of radio signals, selecting a second of the plurality of beams of radio signals for detecting a second version of the synchronization signal transmitted with the second beam of radio signals, and synchronizing with the time divided structure of the wireless access interface from at least one of the first version of the synchronization signal and the second version of the synchronization signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAHI AHMED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3652. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khalid Kassim can be reached on 571-270-3370. 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.
/ABDULLAHI AHMED/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights