DETAILED ACTION
Application filed 3/28/2025 has been examined.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Specification and drawings are accepted.
IDSs have been considered. PTO-1449s are attached.
Application is pending.
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 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19228213.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches a method comprising: obtaining a plurality of individual payloads; encoding each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword, the codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks, each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a self-decodable encoded block; and outputting the codeword, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks, and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword. Whereas claim 1 of U.S. patent application ‘213 teaches a method comprising: transmitting, by a first communication device to a second communication device in a wireless communication network, a codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks generated by error correction encoding respective individual payloads, the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a self-decodable encoded block generated by error correction encoding a first individual payload, and another encoded block generated by error correction encoding a second individual payload combined with a portion of the first individual payload, the portion of the first individual payload being determined for combining with the second individual payload based on an ordering of bits of the first individual payload, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of the another encoded block, and further being decodable jointly with the another encoded block. The concepts of decoding a self-decodable encoded block further being jointly decodable with the other encoded blocks is similar in each application. Therefore the claims are obvious variations of each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19435203.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches a method comprising: obtaining a plurality of individual payloads; encoding each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword, the codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks, each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a self-decodable encoded block; and outputting the codeword, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks, and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword. Whereas claim 1 of U.S. patent application ‘203 teaches a method comprising: encoding a plurality of code blocks to generate a plurality of codewords, the plurality of codewords comprising a first codeword and a second codeword; and outputting the first codeword and the second codeword; wherein the first codeword generated by encoding a first code block of a first code block group that is associated with a first traffic type, the first code block comprising information bits from only the first traffic type, wherein the second codeword is generated by encoding a second code block of a second code block group that is associated with a second traffic type different from the first traffic type, the second code block comprising information bits from the second traffic type and bits associated with the first code block, and wherein the first codeword is decodable independently of the second codeword, and further decodable jointly with the second codeword. The concepts of decoding a self-decodable encoded block further being jointly decodable with the other encoded blocks is similar in each application. Therefore the claims are obvious variations of each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19402766.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches a method comprising: obtaining a plurality of individual payloads; encoding each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword, the codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks, each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a self-decodable encoded block; and outputting the codeword, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks, and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword. Whereas claim 3 of U.S. patent application ‘766 teaches a method, comprising: receiving a first indication from a network device, wherein the first indication is indicative of joint coding on a first resource; wherein the joint coding on the first resource is joint coding for first data for a first terminal device and second data for a second terminal device; wherein the first data and the second data are jointly coded into a first codeword; and wherein the first codeword comprises a plurality of encoded blocks generated by encoding the first data and the second data with an error correction code, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprise a self-decodable encoded block corresponding to the second data, wherein the self-decodable encoded block is decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the first codeword, and the self-decodable encoded block is further decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the first codeword. The concepts of decoding a self-decodable encoded block further being jointly decodable with the other encoded blocks is similar in each application. Therefore the claims are obvious variations of each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19402690.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches a method comprising: obtaining a plurality of individual payloads; encoding each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword, the codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks, each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a self-decodable encoded block; and outputting the codeword, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks, and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword. Whereas claim 2 of U.S. patent application ‘690 teaches a method, comprising: receiving, by a terminal device, first data from a network device on a first resource, wherein the first data comprises second data and third data which are jointly coded; and performing, by the terminal device, decoding on the received first data to obtain the first data; wherein the second data and the third data are jointly coded into a first codeword; and wherein the first codeword comprises a plurality of encoded blocks generated by encoding the second data and the third data with an error correction code, and the plurality of encoded blocks comprise a self-decodable encoded block corresponding to the second data, wherein the self-decodable encoded block is decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the first codeword, and the self-decodable encoded block is further decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the first codeword. The concepts of decoding a self-decodable encoded block further being jointly decodable with the other encoded blocks is similar in each application. Therefore the claims are obvious variations of each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. USPAP 20210167899A1 (herein: D1) in view of Kim et al. USPAP 20140140273A1 (herein: D2).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 1, D1 substantially teaches (i.e., Figure 8 above) a method comprising: obtaining a plurality of individual payloads (i.e., Figure 8 TB1 TB2, reference numbers 805, 810); encoding each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136), the codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks, each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136) and outputting the codeword (i.e., Figure 7 WTRU step 730), the encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 7, step 730 and paragraph 0124), and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword (i.e., Figure 7, step 770 and paragraphs 0125-0126).
PNG
media_image2.png
531
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
D1 does not explicitly teach a self-decodable encoded block as is described in the present application. However D2 teaches in an analogous art (i.e., abstract) a method for performing a HARQ operation in a terminal of a wireless communication system comprises the steps of: receiving, in a subframe n, an uplink grant message for first uplink data from a base station; determining a first HARQ process from among a plurality of HARQ processes associated with the subframe n; and transmitting, in a subframe n+k, the first uplink data to the base station through the first HARQ process. Particularly, D2 teaches (i.e., Figure 11, above and paragraphs 0131-0141) the concept of transmitting/receiving a self-decodable block. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of D2 with D1 in order the initial transmission to include at least one block that is self-decodable. This would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art because one of ordinary skill would have recognized that by having a self-decodable encoded block would have allowed for faster decoding times at the receiver.
As per claim 2, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, joint decoding of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, the joint decoding being based on successful decoding of the self-decodable encoded block independently of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1320 and 1375 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 3, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, enables joint decoding of the self-decodable encoded block after a decoding failure in decoding the self-decodable encoded block independently of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1320 and 1375 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 4, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, generating and outputting incremental redundancy information for the self-decodable encoded block in response to a first request for retransmission (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1345, 1350 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 5, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block, and the subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
As per claim 6, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of an individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads, and the individual payload is encoded to generate the self-decodable encoded block and the subset of bits of the individual payload is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 7, D1 substantially teaches (i.e., Figure 8 above) a method comprising: receiving, from a first communication device by a second communication device in a wireless communication network (i.e., Figure 1A), a codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 8 TB1 TB2, reference numbers 805, 810), each encoded block of the plurality of encoded blocks corresponding to a respective error correction coded individual payload (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136), the encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 7, step 730 and paragraph 0124), and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword (i.e., Figure 7, step 770 and paragraphs 0125-0126).
PNG
media_image2.png
531
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
D1 does not explicitly teach a self-decodable encoded block as is described in the present application. However D2 teaches in an analogous art (i.e., abstract) a method for performing a HARQ operation in a terminal of a wireless communication system comprises the steps of: receiving, in a subframe n, an uplink grant message for first uplink data from a base station; determining a first HARQ process from among a plurality of HARQ processes associated with the subframe n; and transmitting, in a subframe n+k, the first uplink data to the base station through the first HARQ process. Particularly, D2 teaches (i.e., Figure 11, above and paragraphs 0131-0141) the concept of transmitting/receiving a self-decodable block. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of D2 with D1 in order the initial transmission to include at least one block that is self-decodable. This would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art because one of ordinary skill would have recognized that by having a self-decodable encoded block would have allowed for faster decoding times at the receiver.
As per claim 8, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, a first request for retransmission; and receiving, by the second communication device from the first communication device, incremental redundancy information for the self-decodable encoded block in response to the first request for retransmission (i.e., Figure 3, RV0 and RV1 and paragraphs 0084-0085; Figure 13, steps 1345, 1350 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 9, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block, and the subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
As per claim 10, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of an individual payload of the respective individual payloads, and the individual payload is encoded to generate the self-decodable encoded block and the subset of bits of the individual payload is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 11, D1 substantially teaches (i.e., Figure 8 above) an apparatus comprising: at least one processor (i.e., Figure 1A and paragraph 0024); and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, coupled to the at least one processor, storing programming for execution by the at least one processor (i.e., Figure 1A and paragraphs 0024-0046), the programming including instructions to: obtain a plurality of individual payloads (i.e., Figure 8 TB1 TB2, reference numbers 805, 810); encode each of the individual payloads with an error correction code to generate a codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136), each encoded block corresponding to a respective individual payload of the plurality of individual payloads (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136), and the plurality of encoded blocks comprising encoded block (i.e., Figure 7, step 730 and paragraph 0124); and output the codeword, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 7, step 730 and paragraph 0124), and the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword (i.e., Figure 7, step 770 and paragraphs 0125-0126).
PNG
media_image2.png
531
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
D1 does not explicitly teach a self-decodable encoded block as is described in the present application. However D2 teaches in an analogous art (i.e., abstract) a method for performing a HARQ operation in a terminal of a wireless communication system comprises the steps of: receiving, in a subframe n, an uplink grant message for first uplink data from a base station; determining a first HARQ process from among a plurality of HARQ processes associated with the subframe n; and transmitting, in a subframe n+k, the first uplink data to the base station through the first HARQ process. Particularly, D2 teaches (i.e., Figure 11, above and paragraphs 0131-0141) the concept of transmitting/receiving a self-decodable block. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of D2 with D1 in order the initial transmission to include at least one block that is self-decodable. This would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art because one of ordinary skill would have recognized that by having a self-decodable encoded block would have allowed for faster decoding times at the receiver.
As per claim 12, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, enables joint decoding of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, the joint decoding being based on successful decoding of the self-decodable encoded block independently of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1320 and 1375 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 13, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, enables joint decoding of the self-decodable encoded block after a decoding failure in decoding the self-decodable encoded block independently of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1320 and 1375 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 14, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, generate and output incremental redundancy information for the self-decodable encoded block in response to a first request for retransmission (i.e., Figure 13, steps 1345, 1350 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 15, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block, and the subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
As per claim 16, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of an individual payload of the respective individual payloads, and the individual payload is encoded to generate the self-decodable encoded block and the subset of bits of the individual payload is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 17, D1 substantially teaches (i.e., Figure 8 above) an apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, coupled to the at least one processor, storing programming for execution by the at least one processor, the programming including instructions (i.e., Figure 1A and paragraphs 0024-0046) to: receive, from a first communication device in a wireless communication network, a codeword comprising a plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 8 TB1 TB2, reference numbers 805, 810), each encoded block corresponding to respective error correction coded individual payload (i.e., Figure 8, reference numbers 806, 807, 808, 809 for TB1 and 811-816 for TB2 and paragraphs 0128-0136), the plurality of encoded blocks comprising a encoded block, the self-decodable encoded block being decodable independently of other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 7, step 730 and paragraph 0124), the self-decodable encoded block further being decodable jointly with one or more of the other encoded blocks of the plurality of encoded blocks of the codeword (i.e., Figure 7, step 770 and paragraphs 0125-0126).
PNG
media_image2.png
531
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
D1 does not explicitly teach a self-decodable encoded block as is described in the present application. However D2 teaches in an analogous art (i.e., abstract) a method for performing a HARQ operation in a terminal of a wireless communication system comprises the steps of: receiving, in a subframe n, an uplink grant message for first uplink data from a base station; determining a first HARQ process from among a plurality of HARQ processes associated with the subframe n; and transmitting, in a subframe n+k, the first uplink data to the base station through the first HARQ process. Particularly, D2 teaches (i.e., Figure 11, above and paragraphs 0131-0141) the concept of transmitting/receiving a self-decodable block. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of D2 with D1 in order the initial transmission to include at least one block that is self-decodable. This would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art because one of ordinary skill would have recognized that by having a self-decodable encoded block would have allowed for faster decoding times at the receiver.
As per claim 18, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, a first request for retransmission; and receive, from the first communication device, incremental redundancy information for the self-decodable encoded block in response to the first request for retransmission (i.e., Figure 3, RV0 and RV1 and paragraphs 0084-0085; Figure 13, steps 1345, 1350 and paragraph 0160).
As per claim 19, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block, and the subset of bits of the self-decodable encoded block is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
As per claim 20, D1 substantially teaches, in view of above rejections, common bits couple the self-decodable encoded block with each of the one or more of the other encoded blocks, and wherein the common bits are a subset of bits of an individual payload of the respective individual payloads, and the individual payload is encoded to generate the self-decodable encoded block and the subset of bits of the individual payload is encoded to generate the one or more of the other encoded blocks (i.e., Figure 3 and paragraphs 0084-0085).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm.
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, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. 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.
MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2112
/MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Prosecution Insights