DETAILED ACTION
1. The following Office Action is based on the application filed on 26 November 2024, having claims 1-25 and drawing figures 1-10.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
3. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) 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 1-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-32 of U.S. Patent No. 10,637,632 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following rationale:
Claims 1, 5, 7, 12, 22, and 24 are anticipated by claim 1 of the Patent.
Claim 2 is anticipated by claim 2 of the Patent.
Claims 3-4 and 15 are anticipated by claim 3 of the Patent.
Claim 6 is anticipated by claim 4 of the Patent.
Claim 8 is anticipated by claim 5 of the Patent.
Clams 9 and 19 are anticipated by claim 6 of the Patent.
Claims 10 and 20 are anticipated by claim 7 of the Patent.
Claims 11 and 21 are anticipated by claim 8 of the Patent.
Claims 13 and 23 are anticipated by claim 9 of the Patent.
Claims 14 and 16-17 are anticipated by claim 10 of the Patent.
Claim 25 is anticipated by claim 26 of the Patent.
4. Claims 1-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,489,649 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following rationale:
Claims 1-25 are anticipated by claims 1-25 of the Patent, respectively.
5. Claims 1-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,184,460 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following rationale.
Claims 1-25 are anticipated by claims 1-25 of the Patent, respectively.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 1-2, 12-14 and 22-25 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “on the basis of” recited in claims 1-2 must be replaced by the phrase “based on” to render the claims affirmative.
In claim 1, lines 4-5, the phrase “physical downlink control channel, PDCCH” must be written as “Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
The acronym OFDM recited in claims 12-13 must be written as “Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)” in the claims.
In claim 14, line 1, the phrase “base station, BS” must be written as “base station (BS)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
In claim 14, line 1, the phrase “physical downlink control channel, PDCCH” must be written as “Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
The acronym OFDM recited in claims 22-23 must be written as “Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)” in the claims.
In claim 24, line 1, the phrase “user equipment, UE” must be written as “user equipment (UE)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
In claim 24, lines 8-9, the phrase “physical downlink control channel, PDCCH” must be written as “Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
In claim 25, line 1, the phrase “base station, BS” must be written as “base station (BS)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
In claim 25, line 8, the phrase “physical downlink control channel, PDCCH” must be written as “Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH)” the first time it is recited in the claim.
The phrase “or vice versa” recited in claims 14 and 25 must be deleted to render the claims affirmative.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-6, 14-16, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vajapeyam et al. (US 2011/0222491 A1).
For claims 1 and 24, Vajapeyam discloses a method implemented in a user equipment, UE, comprising: receiving system information ([0053] a control bit or flag is broadcast on a broadcast channel (PBCH) to indicate the control and data regions to the UE) indicating a current numerology of a control region with configurable numerology ([0046-0047] the eNB signals the control information for the PDCCH in 1, 2, 4, or 8 CCEs in common search space or UE-specific search space); and
decoding the control region in accordance with a physical downlink control channel, PDCCH, mapping which is selected from PDCCH mappings on the basis of the current numerology ([0046-0047] the UE performs a blind decode based on the number of PDCCH candidates in the control region (Fig 4)).
For claim 2, Vajapeyam discloses comparing a numerology of a data region and said current numerology of the control region, wherein the PDCCH mapping is selected on the basis of an outcome of the comparison ([0046-0047] UE compares PDCCH (control) region with R-PDDCH (data region) to select the PDCCH mapping [0056]).
For claim 3, Vajapeyam discloses receiving an indication of the numerology of the data region ([0046] eNB signals to the UE the K locations of the R-PDCCH data region [0056]).
For claim 4, Vajapeyam discloses the comparison pertains to numerologies of a data region and a control region of a same slot (Fig 2, data region and control region of same slot (period of 14 symbols).
For claim 5, Vajapeyam discloses the system information is received on a broadcast channel ([0053] a control bit or flag is broadcast on a broadcast channel (PBCH) to indicate the control and data regions to the UE).
For claim 6, Vajapeyam discloses the control region comprises a common portion and a UE-specific portion, wherein a numerology of one of the portions is configurable independently of a numerology of the other one of the portions; and said comparison pertains to numerologies of the data region and a common portion of the control region ([0046] control information may be signaled in a common search space or UE-specific search space).
For claims 14 and 25, Vajapeyam discloses a method implemented in a base station, BS ([0046] eNB), comprising: transmitting system information indicating a current numerology of a control region with configurable numerology ([0053] a control bit or flag is broadcast on a broadcast channel (PBCH) to indicate the control region to the UE; [0046-0047] the eNB signals the control information for the PDCCH in 1, 2, 4, or 8 CCEs in common search space or UE-specific search space);
generating a signal using a physical downlink control channel, PDCCH, mapping selected from PDCCH mappings; and transmitting the generated signal in the control region, wherein the PDCCH mapping is selected on the basis of the current numerology of the control region or vice versa ([0046-0047] the eNB signals/transmits the control information for the PDCCH in 1, 2, 4, or 8 CCEs in common search space or UE-specific search space, and the UE performs a blind decode based on the number of PDCCH candidates in the control region (Fig 4));
For claim 15, Vajapeyam discloses transmitting an indication of a numerology of a data region ([0053] a control bit or flag is broadcast on a broadcast channel (PBCH) to indicate the data region to the UE).
For claim 16, Vajapeyam discloses the system information is transmitted on a broadcast channel ([0053] a control bit or flag is broadcast (system information) on a broadcast channel (PBCH) to indicate the control and data regions to the UE).
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 7-13 and 17-23 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims 1 and 14 but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elisabeth B Magloire whose telephone number is (571)272-5601. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM ET.
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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at 571-272-8586. 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.
/ELISABETH BENOIT MAGLOIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights