DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 13/811,064, filed on January 18, 2013.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “first transceiver” and the “second transceiver” recited in claims 1 and 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is not directed to the invention as recited in the claims. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0001], lines 2-3, “filed on February 22, 2024” should be changed to “filed on February 22, 2024, now U.S. Patent No. 12,362,808,”. Patent numbers are issued to granted patents, while application numbers refer to pending applications. Since U.S. Patent No. 12,362,808 has now issued from application 18/584,567, you should update the reference to point to the patent rather than the old app
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The claimed subject matter of “processing circuitry coupled to the communication circuitry and configured to support a first communication scheme and a second communication scheme”, “in the first communication scheme, the communication circuitry receives first data and second data from a first transceiver and a second transceiver in a first frequency band and a second frequency band, respectively, at an identical time, the first data being identical to the second data, and the first frequency band being identical to the second frequency band”, and “in the second communication scheme, the communication circuitry … receives third data from the first transceiver or fourth data from the second transceiver, the third data being different from the fourth data” recited in both claims 1 and 2 fail to provide proper antecedent basis supported by the specification.
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.
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 and 2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,943,032. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims 1 and 2 of the instant application are apparatus claims and claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,943,032 is also an apparatus claim of a mobile terminal. Although the claimed limitations recited in claims 1 and 2 are not identical to the claimed limitations recited in the apparatus claim 1, the structural circuitry is structurally arranged and tuned to receive simultaneous identical signals on the same band. For example, claims 1 and 2 of the instant application recite “[A] mobile terminal comprising: communication circuitry (a wireless communication circuit); and processing circuitry (a processor) coupled to the communication circuitry and configured to support a first communication scheme (a first communication mode) and a second communication scheme (a second communication mode), wherein in the first communication scheme, the communication circuitry receives first data and second data from a first transceiver (a first base station) and a second transceiver (a second base station) in a first frequency band and a second frequency band, respectively, at an identical time, the first data being identical to the second data, and the first frequency band being identical to the second frequency band, and in the second communication scheme, the communication circuitry receives third data from the first transceiver or fourth data from the second transceiver, the third data being different from the fourth data. Regarding the claimed subject matter of “in the second communication scheme, the communication circuitry selects a transceiver from among the first transceiver and the second transceiver to receive third data from the first transceiver or fourth data from the second transceiver, the third data being different from the fourth data”, selecting between known first and second transceivers to route distinct third and fourth data streams is an obvious functional implementation or art-recognized equivalent of the wireless communication circuit defined in claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,943,032.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,362,808 (Claim 1 is a method claim instead of apparatus similar to the apparatus claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,943,032). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 2 of the instant application are apparatus claims and claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,362,808 is a method claim. Similar to claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,943,032 described above, mapping active method steps to structural capabilities demonstrates that equipping a mobile terminal with processing and communication circuitry programmed to perform these schemes makes the physical device a functional counterpart to the method.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 2 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection of the specification as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter, and if a timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shippee (US 2004/0142723 A1) relates to a wireless device comprising: a first receiver portion configured, during a handoff condition, to convert a first signal in a first receive frequency band to a first converted signal in a first frequency band; a second receiver portion configured, during the handoff condition, to convert a second signal in a second receive frequency band distinct from the first receive frequency band to a second converted signal in a second frequency band, wherein the first and second frequency bands at least partially overlap, and wherein the second receiver portion converts the second signal during at least a portion of the time that the first receiver portion converts the first signal; a combiner configured to combine the first converted signal with the second converted signal into a combined signal; and a signal processor configured to process the combined first and second converted signals to extract information from the first converted signal, wherein the signal processor is configured to process the combined signal according to a first mode and simultaneously process the combined signal according to a second mode, distinct from the first mode.
Soliman (US 2008/0002658 A1) relates to an apparatus comprising: a wireless transceiver including a first diversity receiver and a second diversity receiver, wherein the first diversity receiver is configurable to receive first signals using a first frequency of a downlink frequency band of a frequency division duplex (FDD) network, and wherein the second diversity receiver is configurable to receive second signals using the first frequency when the second diversity receiver is in a first mode and using a second frequency of an uplink frequency band of the FDD network when the second diversity receiver is in a second mode; and a processor coupled to the wireless transceiver, the processor configured to: send a peer-to-peer link request to a base station for time division duplex (TDD) communications; receive from the base station a list of potential target wireless devices available for peer-to-peer-communication; select a target wireless device from the list; send to the base station a first message indicating the selection of the target wireless device; receive a second message from the base station, the second message indicating that a peer-to-peer channel has been allocated and reserved for the peer-to-peer communication with the target wireless device, wherein the peer-to-peer channel corresponds to a frequency that is included in the uplink frequency band; configure the second diversity receiver to receive the second signals using the frequency that corresponds to the peer-to-peer channel; transfer data directly to the target wireless device via the peer-to-peer channel; and after the data is transferred, send a third message to the base station, the third message indicating that the peer-to-peer channel is to be deallocated.
Sanchez et al. (US 2012/0113873 A1) relates to a method comprising: providing a first antenna efficiently operable at a first frequency band; providing a second antenna efficiently operable at a second frequency band; directing transmitted signals having frequencies within the first frequency band from a transceiver to the first antenna; directing transmitted signals having frequencies within the second frequency band from the transceiver to the second antenna; directing signals having frequencies within the first frequency band from the first antenna to the transceiver's primary signal ports for the first frequency band; directing signals having frequencies within the first frequency band from the second antenna to the transceiver's diversity signal ports for the first frequency band; directing signals having frequencies within the second frequency band from the second antenna to the transceiver's primary signal ports for the second frequency band; and directing signals having frequencies within the second frequency band from the first antenna to the transceiver's diversity signal ports for the second frequency band.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Young T. Tse whose telephone number is (571)272-3051. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:30am-7pm.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached on 571-272-3042. 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.
/Young T. Tse/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights