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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims recite the limitation “wherein the first receiver and second receiver are the same receiver’, the examiner was unable to find support in the specification for the limitation. Please indicate where support can be found.
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 10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims recite the limitation “wherein the first receiver and second receiver are the same receiver’, since support was not found on the specification it is unclear the scope of the limitation. Also, it is unclear how the first receiver and second receiver can be the same receiver, when the parent claim requires the first receiver to be active or activated with the received signal and at the same time activating again the same already active receiver. Please explain.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 9 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Weyn 20200052371.
As to claim 1, Weyn discloses the method performed by a wireless transmit / receive unit (WTRU) (see par. 0009), the method comprising: receiving, using a first receiver [103 passive receiver], one or more a zero-energy (ZE) waveforms [Passive transceiver 103 is a chipset providing baseband and RF functions for one or more passive wireless standards, i.e., wireless standards that do not rely on the power supply] (see par. 0068); determining that at least one of the one or more ZE waveforms includes a ZE notification, wherein the determination that at least one of the one or more ZE waveforms includes a ZE notification is based on one of a bit flag or a symbol sequence [If one or more bits 313 in register 311 are written or if the one or more bits 313 match a predefined logical combination, then the passive transceiver 103, 203, 303. 503 activates the control unit in step 405.] (see par. 0077-0079); and activating, based on the determination that the ZE waveform includes a ZE notification, a second receiver [102] (see par. 0080).
As to claim 3, Weyn discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first receiver is an active receiver [102] (see par. 0066).
As to claim 4, Weyn discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second receiver is a passive receiver [103] (see par. 0066).
As to claim 5, Weyn discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the WTRU determines that at least one of the one or more ZE waveforms includes a ZE notification by decoding the one or more ZE waveforms (see par. 0077-0079).
Regarding claims 9, 11-13, they are the corresponding wireless transmit / receive unit claims of method claims 1, 3-5. Therefore, claims 9, 11-13 are rejected for the same reasons as shown above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weyn.
As to claims 2 and 10, Weyn discloses everything as disclosed above, but as indicated in the 112 rejections it is unclear the scope of wherein the first receiver and second receiver are the same receiver. For examination purposes the limitation of the same receiver is going to be interpreted as the receivers in the same device (see par. 0009-0013).
Claim(s) 6-8 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weyn in view of Haque 20200314752.
As to claims 6-8 and 14-16, Weyn discloses wherein the WTRU decodes the one or more ZE waveforms (see par. 0077). Weyn fails to disclose based on a reception schedule. In an analogous art, Haque discloses a reception schedule [periodically wakeup and listen to the downlink for pages. This type of scheduled approach is broadly known as duty cycling] (see par. 0145); wherein the reception schedule is based on a cycle length (see par. 0132), wherein the reception schedule is based on a time duration (see par. 0132, 0145). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to add reception scheduling to Weyn for the simple purpose of maintaining communication and compatibility with existing standards.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
MARCOS L. TORRES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights