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 .
Double Patenting
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 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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,825,544. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the following applied rationale:
Regarding claim 1 of the Instant Application (hereinafter IA), claims 1-4 and 8 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations. Claim 2 of Patent ‘544 is directed to claim 1 of the IA as it recites that the configured uplink grants are indicated in the RRC release message, however the corresponding claim limitation recited in claim 1 of the IA is recited in a broader manner. Claim 3 of Patent ‘544 is directed to claim 1 of the IA as it is directed to starting the SDT time window in the RRC inactive state which is the RRC state and time period when the SDT is eligible for transmission however the corresponding claim limitation recited in claim 1 of the IA is recited in a broader manner. Claim 4 of Patent ‘544 is directed to the configured uplink grant which is used to transmit the SDT and thus is determined by action of its usage for transmission of the SDT. Claim 8 of the IA is directed to the claim limitation of receiving downlink control information via the downlink control channel wherein the downlink control information is recited as transmit power control command values that are received during the SDT window.
Regarding claim 2 of the IA, claim 2 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 3 of the IA, claim 3 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 4 of the IA, claim 5 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 5 of the IA, claim 6 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 6 of the IA, claim 6 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 7 of the IA, claim 7 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 8 of the IA, claim 8 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 9 of the IA, claim 9 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 10 of the IA, claim 10 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 11 of the Instant Application (hereinafter IA), claims 11-14 and 18 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations. Claim 12 of Patent ‘544 is directed to claim 11 of the IA as it recites that the configured uplink grants are indicated in the RRC release message, however the corresponding claim limitation recited in claim 11 of the IA is recited in a broader manner. Claim 13 of Patent ‘544 is directed to claim 11 of the IA as it is directed to starting the SDT time window in the RRC inactive state which is the RRC state and time period when the SDT is eligible for transmission however the corresponding claim limitation recited in claim 11 of the IA is recited in a broader manner. Claim 14 of Patent ‘544 is directed to the configured uplink grant which is used to transmit the SDT and thus is determined by action of its usage for transmission of the SDT. Claim 18 of the IA is directed to the claim limitation of receiving downlink control information via the downlink control channel wherein the downlink control information is recited as transmit power control command values that are received during the SDT window.
Regarding claim 12 of the IA, claim 12 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 13 of the IA, claim 13 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 14 of the IA, claim 15 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 15 of the IA, claim 16 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 16 of the IA, claim 16 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 17 of the IA, claim 17 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 18 of the IA, claim 18 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 19 of the IA, claim 19 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Regarding claim 20 of the IA, claim 20 of Patent ‘544 recites substantially similar claim limitations with minor differences in sentence structure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The Examiner has conducted a search of the available Patent and Non-Patent Literature and was unable to find any prior art which teaches either solely or in combination with another reference the claim limitation of “transmit, during the SDT time window, an initial uplink transmission using a first power control adjustment (PCA) state being reset to zero; and transmit, using a second PCA state, a second uplink transmission, wherein, in response to the second uplink transmission being subsequent to the initial uplink transmission during the SDT time window, the second PCA state is based on: the first PCA state; and one or more transmit power control command values received during the SDT time window”, in combination with all the other claim limitations.
The Examiner notes that the claims are only indicated as being allowable over the prior art of record and points out that the claims are currently rejected based on a double patent rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shih et al. Patent US 10,701,702
Teaches in Fig. 9 the transmission be the user equipment (UE) to the Network of uplink transmission information using the preconfigured uplink resources (PUR) whereby early data transmission (EDT) may be performed over the PUR to communicate uplink message without being in a radio resource control (RRC) connected state [Fig. 9, Col. 19, Line 40- Col. 20, Line 50]. However, there is no mention of a SDT time window, reset of the power control adjustment state to zero, receiving of a RRC release message indicating the SDT time window for the SDT in an RRC inactive state, or using a second PCA state to transmit a second uplink transmission subsequent to the initial uplink transmission in the SDT time window wherein the second PCA state is based on the first PCA state and one or more transmit power control (TPC) values received during the SDT time window.
PNG
media_image1.png
436
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
XU et al. US 2023/0276520
XU in Fig. 10 depicts the UE operating in a RRC inactive state following the reception of a RRC release message 1012, wherein the timer associated with the first and the second SDT transmissions (1020 and 1030) is started while in the RRC inactive state. However, Xu has the same shortcomings that are discussed with respect to the Shih reference above
PNG
media_image2.png
474
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONNIE V SWEET whose telephone number is (571)270-3622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/LONNIE V SWEET/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights