Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (Claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 08/12/26 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
3. The IDS submitted on 12/30/24 has been entered and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections/Suggestions
4. Following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 1, “method, comprising” (first line) should be replaced with “method comprising”, “is used” (line 7) should be replaced with “is utilized” and “intelligent reflection surface or backscatter communication” (last line) should be replaced with “an intelligent reflection surface or a backscatter communication”;
in claim 2, “a second sensing result” (line 2) should be replaced with “the second sensing result”;
in claim 6, “second information” (lines 1-2) should be replaced with “the second information”;
in claim 8, “is used” (lines 5 & 8) should be replaced with “is utilized”;
in claim 9, “is used” (line 5) should be replaced with “is utilized”; and
in claim 10, “signal waveform” (line 14) should be replaced with “a signal waveform”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretations
5. 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.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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.
6. 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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: a “first device” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, Applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 2-12 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 pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a measurement error" in line 5. It is not clear whether said "measurement error" is different from or the same "a measurement error" as recited in line 7 of claim 1. Hence, renders claim 2 and its dependent claims indefinite.
Claim 5 recites “location information of a candidate sensing node in a preset spatial range; capability information of the candidate sensing node in the preset spatial range; sensing subscription information of the candidate sensing node in the preset spatial range; sensing permission information of the candidate sensing node in the preset spatial range; or” (lines 8-13). The limitations “the candidate/present” (lines 9-10 & 12) have insufficient antecedent basis because the recitation of “or” in line 13, each of the above limitations is considered independent form each other. Similar rejection applies to claims 6-7.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "a first signal" in line 3. It is not clear whether said "first signal" is different from or the same "a first signal" as recited in line 4 of claim 1.
Reason for Allowance
9. Li (US 2026/0227501 A1) teaches in Figures 1-2 sensing nodes in integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) and in Figure 10 determining a sensing result. Duan (US 2024/0012086 A1) teaches in Figure 5 measurement reports associated with sensing signals. Feng (US 2023/0288528 A1) teaches in Figure 1 an ISAC system that utilizes a first and second sequences to obtain a target node range and speed.
However, with regard to claim 1, the prior art of record fails to disclose said first device (Figure 17: 1700 and/or Figure 18: 1800) as claimed in “combination” with “the corresponding structure, material or act described in the Applicant’s specification as performing the entire claimed function and [or] equivalents thereof” where applicable under 35 U.S.C 112(f).
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to SHAWKAT M. ALI whose telephone number is (571) 270-1639. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:30AM-3:30PM 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 AIR at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, SAM K. AHN can be reached on (571) 272-3044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHAWKAT M ALI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights