www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/853,030
`
`04/20/2020
`
`TETSUYA YAMAMOTO
`
`731456.422C3
`
`9973
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`MOORE JR, MICHAEL J
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2467
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/26/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-16 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)(] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 4/20/2020 is/are: a). accepted or b)@ objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210322
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/853,030
`YAMAMOTOetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`MICHAEL J MOORE JR
`2467
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 4/20/2020.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`2.
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/20/20is in
`
`compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure
`
`statement is being considered by the examiner.
`
`Drawings
`
`3.
`
`Figures 1-3 should be designated by a legend suchas --Prior Art-- because only
`
`that whichis old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawingsin
`
`compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid
`
`abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled
`
`“Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct
`
`any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
`
`Double Patenting
`
`4.
`
`The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created
`
`doctrine groundedin 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 3
`
`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 timelyfiled 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 tofile
`
`provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 etseq.for
`
`applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the
`
`AlA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (b).
`
`The USPTOInternet 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
`
`befilled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets
`
`all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to
`
`www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eT D-info-l.jsp.
`
`Page 4
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. U.S. 10,667,246. Although the claims
`
`at issue are notidentical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of
`
`the following correspondences.
`
`Regarding claim 1, “a terminal, comprising: a receiver, which, in operation,
`
`receives repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of first subframes and a data
`
`signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal’ corresponds to the same
`
`in claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Lastly, “a transmitter, which, in operation, transmits a response signal for the
`
`data signal with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on resource blocks
`
`associated with oneofthe plurality offirst subframes” corresponds to “a transmitter,
`
`which, in operation, transmits the transmission signal’ as well as “performs repetitions of
`
`a responsesignal for the data signal across a plurality of second subframes and
`
`generatesa transmission signal” in claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Claim 1 of the instant application does not claim “multiplying the response signals
`
`in the plurality of second subframes by respective resource blocks which are associated
`
`with one of the plurality of first subframes”. Therefore, claim 1 merely broadens the
`
`scope of claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious
`
`expedientif the remaining elements perform the same function as before. See In re
`
`Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 5
`
`1969). The omission of a reference element whosefunction is not needed would be
`
`obvious to one skilled in the art.
`
`Regarding claim 2, this claim similarly correspondsto claim 2 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 3 and 4, these claims each similarly correspond to claim 3 of
`
`the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claim 5, “a base station, comprising: a transmitter, which, in
`
`operation, transmits repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of first subframes
`
`and a data signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal’ corresponds to
`
`the same in claim 4 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Lastly, “a receiver, which, in operation, receives a responsesignal for the data
`
`signal, which is transmitted with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on
`
`resource blocks associated with one of the plurality of first subframes” corresponds to “a
`
`receiver, which, in operation, receives repetitions of a response signal for the data
`
`signal acrossa plurality of second subframes’”in claim 4 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Claim 5 of the instant application does not claim “the responsesignals in the
`
`plurality of second subframes being multiplied by respective resource blocks which are
`
`associated with oneof the plurality of first subframes’.
`
`Therefore, claim 5 merely broadens the scopeof claim 4 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious
`
`expedientif the remaining elements perform the same function as before. See In re
`
`Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 6
`
`1969). The omission of a reference element whosefunction is not needed would be
`
`obvious to one skilled in the art.
`
`Regarding claim 6, this claim similarly correspondsto claim 7 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 8, these claims each similarly correspond to claim 8 of
`
`the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 9-12, these corresponding “transmission method” claims
`
`similarly correspondto “transmission method’ claims 5, 9, and 10 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 13-16, these corresponding “reception method” claims similarly
`
`correspond to “reception method” claims 6, 11, and 12 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
`
`unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 10,194,428. Although the claims at
`
`issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other becauseof the
`
`following correspondences.
`
`Regarding claim 1, “a terminal, comprising: a receiver, which, in operation,
`
`receives repetitions of a control signal acrossa plurality of first subframes and a data
`
`signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal’ corresponds to the same
`
`in claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Lastly, “a transmitter, which, in operation, transmits a responsesignal for the
`
`data signal with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on resource blocks
`
`associated with oneofthe plurality offirst subframes” corresponds to “a transmitter,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 7
`
`which, in operation, transmits the transmission signal’ as well as “performs repetition of
`
`a responsesignal for the data signal across a plurality of second subframes and
`
`generates a transmission signal” in claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Claim 1 of the instant application does not claim “multiplying the response signals
`
`in the plurality of second subframes by respective components of an inter-subframe
`
`orthogonal code sequence whichis associated with one of the plurality of first
`
`subframes, the inter-subframe orthogonal code sequence being one of a plurality of
`
`sequences which are orthogonal to one another”. Therefore, claim 1 merely broadens
`
`the scopeof claim 1 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious
`
`expedientif the remaining elements perform the same function as before. See In re
`
`Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App.
`
`1969). The omission of a reference element whosefunction is not needed would be
`
`obvious to one skilled in the art.
`
`Regarding claim 2, this claim similarly correspondsto claim 3 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 3 and 4, these claims each similarly correspond to claim 4 of
`
`the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claim 5, “a base station, comprising: a transmitter, which, in
`
`operation, transmits repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of first subframes
`
`and a data signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal’ corresponds to
`
`the same in claim 5 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 8
`
`Lastly, “a receiver, which, in operation, receives a response signal for the data
`
`signal, which is transmitted with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on
`
`resource blocks associated with one of the plurality of first subframes” corresponds to “a
`
`receiver, which, in operation, receives repetitions of a response signal for the data
`
`signal acrossa plurality of second subframes’”in claim 4 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Claim 5 of the instant application does not claim “the responsesignals in the
`
`plurality of second subframes being multiplied by respective components of an inter-
`
`subframe orthogonal code sequence which is associated with one of the plurality of first
`
`subframes, the inter-subframe orthogonal code sequence being one ofa plurality of
`
`sequences which are orthogonal to one another’.
`
`Therefore, claim 5 merely broadens the scopeof claim 5 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious
`
`expedientif the remaining elements perform the same function as before. See In re
`
`Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App.
`
`1969). The omission of a reference element whosefunction is not needed would be
`
`obvious to one skilled in the art.
`
`Regarding claim 6, this claim similarly correspondsto claim 3 of the above U.S.
`
`Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 8, these claims each similarly correspond to claim 4 of
`
`the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claim 9, this “transmission method” claim similarly corresponds to
`
`“transmission method” claim 6 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 9
`
`Regarding claims 10-12, these claims each similarly correspond to claims 3 and
`
`4 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claim 13, this “reception method” claim similarly corresponds to
`
`“reception method’claim 7 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Regarding claims 14-16, these claims each similarly correspond to claims 3 and
`
`4 of the above U.S. Patent.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`7.
`
`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 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.
`
`8.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that
`
`form the basis for the rejections under this section madein this Office action:
`
`A personshall be entitled to a patent unless —
`
`(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an
`application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the
`patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and waseffectively filed
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
`
`9.
`
`Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being
`
`anticipated by Chen et al. (U.S. 2016/0337089) (hereinafter “Chen”). Chen teachesall
`
`of the limitations of the specified claims with the reasoning thatfollows.
`
`Regarding claim 1, “a terminal comprising: a receiver, which, in operation,
`
`receives repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of first subframes and a data
`
`signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal” is anticipated by the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 10
`
`terminal shown in Figure 7 that includes a receiving module (receiver), where downlink
`
`allocation information (control signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PDCCH ina
`
`plurality of continuous downlink sub-frames to the terminal, and downlink service data
`
`(data signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PDSCH in a plurality of continuous
`
`downlink sub-frames to the terminal as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0011], lines 18-
`
`25.
`
`Lastly, “a transmitter, which, in operation, transmits a response signal for the
`
`data signal with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on resource blocks
`
`associated with one of the plurality of first subframes’ is anticipated by the terminal
`
`shownin Figure 7 that includes a transmitting module (transmitter), wnere HARQ-ACK
`
`feedback information (response signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PUCCH
`
`format 1a/1b channel in a plurality of continuous uplink sub-frames (second subframes)
`
`as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0011], lines 22-25; where each sub-frame of the
`
`system reserves at least one PUCCH resource for PUCCH, each PUCCH resource
`
`occupying two resource blocks respectively located in two time slots of a sub-frame as
`
`spoken of on page 1, paragraph [0005].
`
`Regarding claim 5, “a base station, comprising: a transmitter, which, in
`
`operation, transmits repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of first subframes
`
`and a data signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal’ is anticipated
`
`by the base station shownin Figure 7 that includes a transmitting module (transmitter),
`
`where downlink allocation information (control signal) is repetitively transmitted through
`
`a PDCCH in a plurality of continuous downlink sub-framesby the base station, and
`
`downlink service data (data signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PDSCH ina
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 11
`
`plurality of continuous downlink sub-frames by the base station as spoken of on page 2,
`
`paragraph [001 1], lines 18-25.
`
`Lastly, “a receiver, which, in operation, receives a responsesignal for the data
`
`signal, which is transmitted with repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on
`
`resource blocks associated with one of the plurality of first subframes’ is anticipated by
`
`the base station shownin Figure 7 that includes a receiving module (receiver), where
`
`HARQ-ACK feedbackinformation (response signal) is repetitively transmitted through a
`
`PUCCH format 1a/1b channel in a plurality of continuous uplink sub-frames (second
`
`subframes) as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0011], lines 22-25; where each sub-
`
`frame of the system reserves at least one PUCCH resource for PUCCH, each PUCCH
`
`resource occupying two resource blocks respectively located in two time slots of a sub-
`
`frame as spoken of on page 1, paragraph [0005].
`
`Regarding claim 9, “receiving repetitions of a control signal across a plurality of
`
`first subframes and a data signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control signal”
`
`is anticipated by the terminal shown in Figure 7 that includes a receiving module
`
`(receiver), where downlink allocation information (control signal) is repetitively
`
`transmitted through a PDCCH in a plurality of continuous downlink sub-frames to the
`
`terminal, and downlink service data (data signal) is repetitively transmitted through a
`
`PDSCH in a plurality of continuous downlink sub-framesto the terminal as spoken of on
`
`page 2, paragraph [0011], lines 18-25.
`
`Lastly, “transmitting a response signal for the data signal with repetitions across
`
`a plurality of second subframes on resource blocks associated with one of the plurality
`
`of first subframes’”is anticipated by the terminal shownin Figure 7 that includes a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 12
`
`transmitting module (transmitter), where HARQ-ACK feedbackinformation (response
`
`signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PUCCH format 1a/1b channel in a plurality of
`
`continuous uplink sub-frames (second subframes) as spoken of on page 2, paragraph
`
`[0011], lines 22-25; where each sub-frame of the system reservesat least one PUCCH
`
`resource for PUCCH, each PUCCH resource occupying two resource blocks
`
`respectively located in two time slots of a sub-frame as spoken of on page 1, paragraph
`
`[0005].
`
`Regarding claim 13, “transmitting repetitions of a control signal across a plurality
`
`of first subframes and a data signal allocated to a resource indicated by the control
`
`signal” is anticipated by the base station shown in Figure 7 that includes a transmitting
`
`module (transmitter), where downlink allocation information (control signal) is
`
`repetitively transmitted through a PDCCH in a plurality of continuous downlink sub-
`
`frames by the base station, and downlink service data (data signal) is repetitively
`
`transmitted through a PDSCH in a plurality of continuous downlink sub-frames by the
`
`base station as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0011], lines 18-25.
`
`Lastly, “receiving a response signal for the data signal, which is transmitted with
`
`repetitions across a plurality of second subframes on resource blocks associated with
`
`one of the plurality of first subframes’”is anticipated by the base station shownin Figure
`
`7 that includes a receiving module (receiver), where HARQ-ACK feedbackinformation
`
`(response signal) is repetitively transmitted through a PUCCH format 1a/1b channel in a
`
`plurality of continuous uplink sub-frames (second subframes) as spoken of on page 2,
`
`paragraph [0011], lines 22-25; where each sub-frame of the system reserves atleast
`
`one PUCCH resource for PUCCH, each PUCCH resource occupying two resource
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 13
`
`blocks respectively located in two time slots of a sub-frame as spoken of on page 1,
`
`paragraph [0005].
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`10.
`
`‘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 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.
`
`11.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousnessrejections 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.
`
`12.=This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the
`
`claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was
`
`commonly ownedasof the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any
`
`evidenceto the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to
`
`point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly
`
`ownedas ofthe effectivefiling date of the later invention in order for the examiner to
`
`consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2)
`
`prior art against the later invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 14
`
`13.
`
`Claims 2-4, 6-8, 10-12, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
`
`unpatentable over Chen in view of Earnshawetal. (U.S. 2013/0235768) (hereinafter
`
`“Earnshaw’).
`
`Regarding claims 2, 6, 10, and 14, Chen teachesclaims 1, 5, 9, and 13 as
`
`described above. While Chen also teaches where spacing between the last sub-frame
`
`occupied by the PDSCH and a starting sub-frame occupied by the PUCCH format 1a/1b
`
`channel is in total three subframes (indicates subframe period) as spoken of on page 2,
`
`paragraph [0011], lines 25-31, Chen doesnot explicitly teach “wherein a numberof the
`
`repetitions of the response signal is an integer multiple of a subframe period in which
`
`transmission of the response signal with repetitions is started”.
`
`However, Earnshaw teaches a system and methodfor handling scheduling
`
`requestcollisions with an ACK/NACK repetition signal where a value of a scheduling
`
`requestprohibit timer may be configured to represent a multiple of the scheduling
`
`request periodicity (subframe period), which may be equal to a scheduling request
`
`period multiplied by an integer (integer multiple) in the range from 0 to 7, inclusive, such
`
`that a collision with a ACK/NACK repetition sequence (response signal) may be avoided
`
`as spoken of on pages 5-6, paragraph [0038].
`
`Given the abovereferences, it would have been obvious to someoneof ordinary
`
`skill in the art, before the effectivefiling date of the invention, to apply the ACK/NACK
`
`repetition signal handling of Earnshaw to the system of Chenin order to improve the
`
`reliability of the communication system by reducing the possibility of collisions between
`
`ACK/NACK responsesignaling and other control messaging as spoken of on pages5-6,
`
`paragraph [0038] of Earnshaw.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 15
`
`Regarding claims 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, and 16, Chen teachesclaims 1, 5, 9, and
`
`13 as described above. While Chen also teaches where each sub-frame of the system
`
`reserves at least one PUCCH resource for PUCCH, each PUCCH resource occupying
`
`two resource blocks respectively located in two time slots of a sub-frame (one-to-one
`
`association) as spoken of on page 1, paragraph [0005], as well as where a PUCCH is
`
`determined by preset resources such as control channel elements occupied by the
`
`PDCCH (one-to-one association) as spoken of on page 3, paragraph [0036], Chen does
`
`not explicitly teach “wherein a number of the repetitions of the response signal is an
`
`integer multiple of a subframe period in which transmission of the response signal with
`
`repetitions is started, and the plurality of first subframes per the subframe period are
`
`associated one-to-one with the resource blocks” or “wherein a number of the repetitions
`
`of the response signal is an integer multiple of a subframe period in which transmission
`
`of the responsesignal with repetitions is started, and the plurality of second subframes
`
`per the subframe period are associated one-to-one with the resource blocks’.
`
`However, Earnshaw teaches a system and methodfor handling scheduling
`
`requestcollisions with an ACK/NACK repetition signal where a value of a scheduling
`
`requestprohibit timer may be configured to represent a multiple of the scheduling
`
`request periodicity (subframe period), which may be equal to a scheduling request
`
`period multiplied by an integer (integer multiple) in the range from 0 to 7, inclusive, such
`
`that a collision with a ACK/NACK repetition sequence (response signal) may be avoided
`
`as spoken of on pages 5-6, paragraph [0038].
`
`Given the abovereferences, it would have been obvious to someoneof ordinary
`
`skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the ACK/NACK
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 16
`
`repetition signal handling of Earnshaw to the system of Chenin order to improve the
`
`reliability of the communication system by reducing the possibility of collisions between
`
`ACK/NACK responsesignaling and other control messaging as spoken of on pages 5-6,
`
`paragraph [0038] of Earnshaw.
`
`Conclusion
`
`14.‘
`
`The prior art made of record and notrelied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure. References considered relevant to this application are listed in
`
`the attached “Notice of References Cited” (PTO-892).
`
`15.—Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J. MOORE, JR., whose telephone number is
`
`(571)272-3168. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9am-4pm).
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video
`
`conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-basedcollaboration tool. To schedule an
`
`interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO AutomatedInterview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Hassan A. Phillips can be reached at (571)272-3940. 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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/853,030
`Art Unit: 2467
`
`Page 17
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on accessto 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.
`
`/MICHAEL J MOORE JR/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
`
`