Small Data Transmission (SDT)

Overview “Signals for transitioning to a radio resource control (RRC) connected state and maintaining the RRC connected state could cause overheads (e.g., power consumption and delay) to a wireless device having small amount of data to transmit when in an RRC idle state or an RRC inactive state.” See also https://ofinno.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/OFNO_14768-White-Sheet-M4_070121.pdf

Withdrawal of Finality of OA

This is a complex topic, but interesting: ——————————————————————————–From: TC 2600 DirectorsSent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:02 AMCc: Campbell, Dianne; Christensen, Andrew; Groody, James; Hunter, Daniel; Knode, Marian; Powell, Mark; Walker, WandaSubject: Instruction Regarding Making an Office Action FINAL Recently a question has come up about whether a consecutive FINAL Office action with a new ground … Continue reading Withdrawal of Finality of OA

Tesla will assert its patents covering electronic storage system against competitors?

Some of you may remember that Tesla pledged not to assert its patents about e-vehicles against others in 2014. See Tesla’s blog (https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you ) Does the pledge mean that Tesla will not assert patent related to non-vehicle products like electronic storage? IAM recently published online article, saying that Tesla’s pledge “does not say anything about … Continue reading Tesla will assert its patents covering electronic storage system against competitors?

[PCT] Lack of unity of invention (“a priori” “a posteriori”)

10.03 Lack of unity of invention may be directly evident “a priori,” that is, before considering the claims in relation to any prior art, or may only become apparent “a posteriori,” that is, after taking the prior art into consideration. For example, independent claims to A + X, A + Y, X + Y can … Continue reading [PCT] Lack of unity of invention (“a priori” “a posteriori”)

[PTO] Where to find 101 SME Guideline and Update

In some of my prosecution cases, some claims were / are rejected under 35 USC 101. In order to develop rebuttal arguments, I need to check the latest USPTO guideline(s) about the 101 SME (Subject Matter Eligibility). First, the following is the link for the 2019 PEG (Patent Eligibility Guideline) published in January 2019: https://www.regulations.gov/document/PTO-P-2019-0034-0001Continue reading [PTO] Where to find 101 SME Guideline and Update

Claim format – “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”

In patent applications, it is very usual to add a claim reciting “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.” Applicants can argue that such claim should not be construed as being directed to an abstract idea because the claim specifically recites a tangible item like “a non transitory compure-readable storage medium.” The following is an example of … Continue reading Claim format – “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”