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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the preliminary amendment received 11/24/2025.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, and 20 are amended.
Claims 1 – 20 are presented for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 365(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2025 and 08/20/2025 were received. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1 – 20 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.
Regarding claims 1 – 20, the limitation “element: 0, 1, and 2”, “element 1”, and “element 2” are 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear the scope of “element”. Specifically, specification, page 2, 7, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 36, 37, 45, and 48, appear to use the term in multiple ways. One of ordinary skill would be unclear if “element” is a symbolic value or a value in a matrix.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “the element 2 in the second base matrix is expanded to an n*n all-1 matrix” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear the scope of “element”.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “T” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear the scope of “T”.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “[1 2 1 2]”, “[1 1 1 2 2]”, and “[2 1 1 1 2]” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear if the values “1” and “2” refer to elements or other representation.
Regarding claim 8 – 13, the limitation “1” and “2” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear if the values “1” and “2” refer to elements or other representation.
Regarding claim 14, the limitation “a non-zero element represents a Z*Z circulant permutation matrix” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear the relationship between “element” and “Element: 0, 1, and 2” disclosed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “T” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear the scope of “T”.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “[1 2 1 2 …]” and “[1 1 1 1 …]” is 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. One of ordinary skill in the art would be unclear if the values “1” and “2” refer to elements or other representation.
Any claim not addressed above is rejected due to its dependency on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Independent claims 1 and 17 are directed to a mathematical relationship or algorithm that have been identified as abstract by numerous courts.
In analyzing claim 1 of the instant application, the limitations “performing low-density parity-check (LDPC) encoding on the first bit sequence based on a check matrix, to obtain a second bit sequence, wherein the check matrix is obtained based on a first base matrix corresponding to a second base matrix, the second base matrix comprises elements: 0, 1, and 2, an element 1 in a 2nd column of a check part in the second base matrix and an element 2 in a 1Ps column of the check part are located in a same row, and a quantity of elements 1 in the 2nd column of the check part is less than or equal to a quantity of elements 2 in the 1st column of the check part; and the second bit sequence comprises M check bits, and M is a positive integer” is directed to a mathematical algorithm, thus, abstract.
Furthermore, limitations such as “obtaining a first bit sequence comprising K information bits, and K is a positive integer” and “sending the second bit sequence” are merely intended use statements that do not define encoding method to be anything more than well known, generic computer operations.
Claims 2 – 16 recite no additional limitation that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea defined in independent claim 1.
Claim 2
Abstract idea
Claim 3
Abstract idea
Claim 4
Abstract idea
Claim 5
Abstract idea
Claim 6
Abstract idea
Claim 7
Abstract idea
Claim 8
Abstract idea
Claim 9
Abstract idea
Claim 10
Abstract idea
Claim 11
Abstract idea
Claim 12
Abstract idea
Claim 13
Abstract idea
Claim 14
Abstract idea
Claim 15
Abstract idea
Claim 16
Abstract idea
In analyzing claim 17 of the instant application, the limitations “perform low-density parity-check (LDPC) encoding on the first bit sequence based on a check matrix, to obtain a second bit sequence, wherein the check matrix is obtained based on a first base matrix corresponding to a second base matrix, the second base matrix comprises elements: 0, 1, and 2, an element 1 in a 2nd column of a check part in the second base matrix and an element 2 in a 1st column of the check part are located in a same row, and a quantity of elements 1 in the2nd column of the check part is less than or equal to a quantity of elements 2 in the 1st column of the check part: and the second bit sequence comprises M check bits, and M is a positive integer” is directed to a mathematical algorithm, thus, abstract.
The additional elements recited in the claims such as a “at least one processor” and “transceiver” are merely generic computer elements performing generic computer functions, and merely managing data is routine and well known in the art (TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC), thus, the claimed invention does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Furthermore, limitations such as “obtain a first bit sequence including K information bits, and K is a positive integer” and “send the second bit sequence” are merely intended use statements that do not define the communication apparatus to be anything more than well known, generic computer elements.
Claims 18 – 20 recite no additional limitation that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea defined in independent claim 17.
Claim 18
Abstract idea
Claim 19
Abstract idea
Claim 20
Abstract idea
Accordingly, for the reasons provided above, claims 1 – 20 are directed to an abstract idea, hence, not patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
AHN; Seokki et al. US 20220224359 A1
Li; Liguang et al. US 20220038115 A1
Koila; Shriharsha et al. US 20210306004 A1
Xu; Jin et al. US 20210288667 A1
Li; Liguang et al. US 20210013901 A1
Li; Liguang et al. US 20200145026 A1
BYUN; Ilmu et al. US 20190268092 A1
XU; Jun et al. US 20170230058 A1
Sugihara; Kenya et al. US 20150188578 A1
Lakkis; Ismail US 7853862 B2
obtaining a first bit sequence comprising K information bits, and K is a positive integer;
performing low-density parity-check (LDPC) encoding on the first bit sequence based on a check matrix, to obtain a second bit sequence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL F MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Mark Featherstone can be reached at (571)270-3750. 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.
/Daniel F. McMahon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2111
Prosecution Insights