CTNF 18/968,778 CTNF 78853 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: receive end device” and “transmit end device” in claims 1-15. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 9, 10, 12, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pakrooh et al. U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2023/0361809 . Regarding claims 1, 10 and 16, Pakrooh discloses a signaling transmission method and associated apparatus with a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (e.g. see Fig. 2), comprising: receiving, by a receive end device (i.e. Responder – Fig. 5), a first UWB signal from a transmit end device (i.e. Initiator), and sending, by the receive end device, first indication information to the transmit end device, wherein the first indication information indicates a first number of fragment signals of a second UWB signal, wherein the first indication information is determined based on the first signal, as Pakrooh teaches that time and frequency may be refined during UWB fragments using messages transmitted via the ranging measurement signals 515, 530 of a previous TWR round, and then may be used for subsequent TWR rounds without another transmission of a narrowband synchronization message 510 (¶ [0101]), and where one or more messages by the responder may be used to signal an early termination request, where the responder may compute how many UWB fragments are needed, and signal the number of UWB fragments to the initiator (¶ [0102]). Regarding claims 3, 12 and 18, Pakrooh further discloses that the number of fragments may be measured based on a received power, where based on the received power, the number of UWB fragments needed may be determined (¶ [0102]). Regarding claim 9, Pakrooh further discloses receiving, by the receive end device, a poll message from the transmit end device, which indicates a sending sequence of a UWB signal and a narrowband signal that are transmitted in a measurement control phase (¶ [0079]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pakrooh et al. in view of Lee et al. U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2023/0171642 . Regarding claims 2, 11 and 17, Pakrooh discloses a signaling transmission method and associated apparatus with CRM for transmitting first indication information, as indicated above, but does not disclose that the information is carried in an information element that comprises a first address size specifier field or a first address field that indicates an address of the device that receives the first information element. Lee discloses the use of a destination address field in information exchanges for UWB messages (¶¶ [0159]-0162]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide address field information as suggested by Lee, for the information indicated by Pakrooh, so the correct recipient is aware that it is the intended recipient . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pakrooh et al. in view of Hammerschmidt et al. U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2022/0137177 (cited by Applicant) . Regarding claims 4, 13 and 19, Pakrooh discloses a signaling transmission method and associated apparatus with CRM for transmitting first indication information, as indicated above, but does not disclose receiving configuration information indicating a configuration of the first or second UWB signals. Hammerschmidt discloses that configuration information regarding UWB signals may be provided to help tailor the reception of incoming UWB fragments (¶ [0059]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide configuration information regarding incoming UWB signals, as suggested by Hammerschmidt, in the method/apparatus of Pakrooh, to tailor UWB reception for incoming UWB signals, as indicated by Hammerschmidt . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 5-8, 14, 15 and 20 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David B. Lugo whose telephone number is 571-272-3043. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Hannah Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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. /DAVID B LUGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631 6/13/2026 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 2 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 3 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 4 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 5 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 6 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 7 Art Unit: 2631 Application/Control Number: 18/968,778 Page 8 Art Unit: 2631
Prosecution Insights