DETAILED ACTION
Applicants’ response filed 7/15/26 has been considered.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-7 and 15 are pending.
No claim amendments were presented.
Prior rejections under 35 USC 101 are maintained in view of remarks.
Prior rejections under 35 USC 102 are maintained in view of remarks.
Application is pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 7/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
For example, claim 1 recites:
PNG
media_image1.png
320
766
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicants contend the claims are directed towards a practical application and state the claims are therefore statutory under 35 USC 101. Applicants cite MPEP 2106.04 which states, “…claim reciting a judicial exception is not directed to the judicial exception if it also recites additional elements demonstrating that the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.” The Examiner would like to point out that there is nothing in the claim that demonstrates that claim as a whole recites additional elements that would lead it to a practical application. The claim language is generally directed towards data manipulation by way of encoding using a LDPC code. As stated, this can be done mentally or by pen and paper. Therefore the claim is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more and is not integrated into a practical application with significantly more. Therefore the claims remain rejected under 35 USC 101. See prior office action for details.
Regarding rejections under 35 USC 102, Applicants contend, “Wu does not describe generating parity bits by multiplying message data bits with a generator matrix derived from a PCM.” PCM being parity check matrix. The Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to point out that the math behind LDPC codes inherently includes both a generator matrix and a parity check matrix. The generator matrix is used at the encoding side by multiplying the message bits with the generator matrix whereas the parity check matrix is used at the receiver during decoding. In other words, a LDPC decoding can not take place on a received message unless the message was multiplied by the generator matrix to generate the codewords.
For example, Wu teaches (i.e., Figure 11, below and paragraphs 0103-0141) a transmitter device or node which is used to generator LDPC codewords for transmission (as shown in Figure 10).
PNG
media_image2.png
743
445
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wu teaches in Figure 11, as indicated at 1105, the transmitter device transmits signaling to the receiver device indicating that the transmitter device supports use of a first LDPC codeword length that is greater than or equal to a threshold LDPC codeword length (e.g., supports use of a long LDPC codeword). Furthermore Wu teaches as indicated at 1110, the transmitter device determines (or obtains information indicating) whether one or more conditions have been satisfied (or met). The conditions are associated with (or based on) the capability information of the receiver device, a bandwidth value, a resource unit (RU) size, a multiple RU (MRU) size, a modulation coding scheme (MCS) level, a number of spatial streams, a number of coded bits per orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol, a number of data bits per OFDM symbol, and/or one or more frequency bands for at least one of transmission or reception operations. In some aspects, some of the conditions may be associated with (or based on) certain implementation features associated with the transmitter device. Therefore there is sufficient evidence that Wu teaches to encoded message bits with LDPC encoder which inherently uses a generator matrix to generate the codewords.
It is the Examiner’s conclusion that the claims of the present application, as presented, are not novel and are not statutory under 35 USC 101. Applicants are encouraged to formulate claim language that clearly defines the novelty of the application. Prior rejections are maintained. See prior office action for details. If Applicants believe an interview with the Examiner might be useful, then they are welcome to contact the Examiner with proposed amendments for a discussion.
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 MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. 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.
MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2112
/MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Prosecution Insights