DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the amendments received on 01/21/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 7, line 4, “a sub-GHz frequency band” should be replaced by the sub-GHz frequency band. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 9-11 depend on claim 7, therefore they have been objected to as well.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 7, lines 9-10, “first signal data representing to obtain the first signal” should be replaced by first signal data used to obtain the first signal. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 7, line 13, “second signal data representing to obtain the second signal” should be replaced by second signal data used to obtain the second signal;. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 11, line 2, “the first protocol” should be replaced by a first protocol. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 11, line 3, “the second protocol” should be replaced by a second protocol. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: as to claim 22, line 1, “wherein front end circuitry” should be replaced by wherein the front end circuitry. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “first module”, “second module”, and “third module” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 32, 33, 35, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sinha et al. (hereinafter, referred to as Sinha) (US 2004/0152418).
As to claim 32, Sinha discloses a method (see the abstract and Fig. 2) comprising: receiving, from a first module (see Fig. 2, block 225 is interpreted as the “first module” and block 235 is interpreted as a “second module” and see paragraphs 0002, 0032-0033, and 0051) of a sub-GHz radio (see paragraphs 0014 and 0039-0040), first data indicating that the first module has successfully detected a preamble for a first modulation scheme (see Fig. 2, blocks 225 and 235 and paragraphs 0002, 0013, 0033, and 0051-0052), wherein the first module is associated with the first modulation scheme (see Fig. 2, block 225 and paragraphs 0002 and 0032-0033), wherein the sub-GHz radio comprises front end circuitry (see Fig. 2, block 210), and an analog to digital converter (see Fig. 2, the combination of ADCs 215’ and ADC 215”); and based on the receiving of the first data, sending, to a second module of the sub-GHz radio, second data (see Fig. 2 and paragraphs 0051 and 0057, receiver 260 can provide a signal useful for disabling the demodulator 235 in response to the control signal that indicates an OFDM packet is received) causing the second module to cease attempting to detect a preamble for a second modulation scheme, wherein the second module is associated with the second modulation scheme (see paragraphs 0013, 0051-0052, and 0057).
As to claims 33 and 35, Sinha discloses sending third data adjusting a gain level for the sub-GHz radio (see paragraphs 0014, 0039-0040, 0045 and Fig. 2, the inputs of AGC 240).
As to claim 37, Sinha discloses that the first module is configured to perform a first set of one or more preamble detection operations to attempt to detect a preamble for a first modulation scheme, and wherein the second module is configured to perform a second set of one or more preamble detection operations to attempt to detect a preamble for a second modulation scheme (see Fig. 2, blocks 225 and 235 and paragraphs 0003, 0013, 0051-0053, and 0057).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinha, in view of Yanagisawa et al. (hereinafter, referred to as Yanagisawa) (US 2014/0241456).
As to claim 34, Sinha discloses all the subject matters claimed in claim 34, except that the front-end circuitry comprises a variable gain amplifier and sending a third signal indicating to adjust a gain level associated with the variable gain amplifier. Yanagisawa, in the same field of endeavor, discloses an electrical device comprising a variable gain amplifier in a front-end circuit (see Fig. 6, PGA 22 in AFE 20 and paragraph 0044), a first preamble detection unit (see Fig. 6, block 25), a first demodulator (see Fig. 6, block 27), a second preamble detection unit (see Fig. 6, block 26), and a second demodulator (see Fig. 6, block 28). Yanagisawa further discloses that a gain controller is arranged to adjust a gain of the PGA using the AGC when the first preamble detection unit outputs a preamble detection signal to the AGC (see paragraph 0081). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify the teachings of Sinha, as suggested by Yanagisawa, in order to increase the performance of the electrical device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18, 21, and 23-25 are allowed.
Claims 7, 9-11, and 22 would be allowable if rewritten in a way that overcomes the objections cited above.
Claim 36 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEILA MALEK whose telephone number is (571)272-8731. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Chieh 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.
LEILA . MALEK
Examiner
Art Unit 2632
/LEILA MALEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights