Detailed Action
1. This Office Action is responsive to the Preliminary Amendment filed 08/26/2025. Claims 1-20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-40 have been added as new claims and are presented for examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Specification
3. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 1, under section “Cross-Reference to Related Applications”, the cited copending applications (18/606,971) should be updated with current statuses such as U.S. Patent Application Serial No., the filing date, U.S. Patent No., and the issued date.
Double Patenting
5. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
6. Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 18/606,971, now U.S. Patent No. 12,317,298.
For example:
Instant application 19/218,166
U.S. Patent No. 12,317,298
Claim 21. A system comprising:
an arbiter device including a memory device and at least one computer processor coupled to the memory device wherein the arbiter device is configured by executable code stored in the memory device to:
communicate with at least one client device over a wireless network;
obtain capability information for a plurality of streams to be opened with the at least one client device;
determine, based on the capability information, a combined network messaging schedule that assigns non-overlapping communication intervals that define time slots for the plurality of streams;
send the combined network messaging schedule to the at least one client device;
receive, during the time slots assigned to the plurality of streams, payload data for respective ones of the plurality of streams without per transaction stream identifiers; and demultiplex the payload data to the respective streams based only on the time slots in the combined network messaging schedule.
Claim 1. A system comprising:
a memory device;
at least one processor coupled to the memory device;
an asynchronous data stream to be opened with an arbiter device and a client device, the asynchronous data stream associated with a first set of capabilities;
an audio stream to be opened with the arbiter device and the client device, the audio stream associated with a second set of capabilities; and
a wireless network architecture that determines a network messaging schedule based on the first set of capabilities and the second set of capabilities,
the network messaging schedule and a time instant at which to initiate communications according to the network messaging schedule sent to the client devices associated with the asynchronous data stream and the audio stream.
Claim 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the network messaging schedule determines first communication intervals for the asynchronous data stream based on the first set of capabilities and second communication intervals for the audio stream based on the second set of capabilities.
7. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,317,298 substantially disclose every element of claims 21-40 of the instant application and thus anticipate the claims of the instant application. Claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. A later application claim is not patently distinct from an earlier claim if the later claim is anticipated by the earlier claim.
“A later patent claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim obvious over, or anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus)”. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY vs. BARR LABORATORIES INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 21-40 are allowable over the prior arts.
9. Further references of interest are cited on Form PTO-892, which is an attachment to this Office Action.
10. A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE (3) months from the mailing date of this communication. See 37 CFR 1.134.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3886.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s SPE, Wing Chan, can be reached at (571) 272-7493. The fax phone number for the organization is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from the Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications 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 or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QUANG N NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights