DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/13/2026 has been entered.
Priority
Per the applicant’s remarks (see pgs. 6 and 7, filed 5/13/2026) and the interview held on 4/20/2026, the applicant and examiner agree that the present claims have support under 35 USC § 112(a) within Provisional Application No. 63/419,569, filed 10/26/2022. Therefore, for the purposes of applying prior art, the examiner considers 10/26/2022 the earliest effective filing date of the present claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6 and 7, filed 10/26/2022, with respect to 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-11, 13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verso et al. (NPL U cited on pg. 2 of PTO-892 dated 9/22/2025, doc: 15-22-0467-01-04ab) in view of Liu et al. (US PG Pub 2025/0119238).
As per claim 1, Verso et al. teach a method comprising:
…a packet including a first header and a second header [Verso, slide 4, bullet 1, “This proposal reduces the overhead of having to send the PHR at the lowest supported rate by splitting the PHR into a rate header (PHR1) sent at a low rate and a main header (PHR2) sent at a high rate”, The UWB physical header (PHR, see slide 2, bullet 5 and slide 3) is split into a first header (PHR1) and a second header (PHR2). See also slide 9 showing an example packet with PHR1 and PHR2.], the first header including a plurality of bits indicating a data rate [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 1, “PHR1 can be very short. Three bits is sufficient to specify all the rates being considered at TG4ab”, PHR1 includes 3 bits to indicate the data rate supported (see slide 4, table).] and an encoding scheme of a payload of the packet [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 2, “ PHR1 can be very short. A fourth bit might be needed to signal LDPC if this affects the modulation of PHR2, otherwise indication of LDPC could be done in PHR2”, A 4-bit PHR1 includes a final bit to indicate whether LDPC (or an encoding scheme) is used.].
Verso et al. do not explicitly teach generating, by a first ultra-wideband (UWB) device, a packet…transmitting, by the first UWB device, the packet to a second UWB device.
However, in an analogous art, Liu et al. teach generating, by a first ultra-wideband (UWB) device, a packet…transmitting, by the first UWB device, the packet to a second UWB device [Liu, fig. 3, steps 301-303, ¶ 0123, “The transmit end obtains the information bit of the PPDU, and then performs processing based on the information bit of the PPDU and the mapping relationship between a data symbol and a chip sequence, to obtain the modulated symbol. The processing herein may include at least one of the following: mapping from an information bit to a data symbol, mapping from a data symbol to a chip sequence, and modulation. For example, the generating a PPDU shown in step 301 may include generating the modulated symbol of the PPDU”, In step 301, the transmit ends generates a PPDU (see ¶ 0110), where the PPDU includes a structure of a UWB communication (see fig. 4a, ¶s 0117 and 0122). The PPDU is then transmitted to the receive end (see step 302, ¶ 0141). The receive end processes (or decodes) the PPDU (see ¶ 0143). The transmit end and receive end of fig. 3 (see ¶s 0196-0199) each include a processing unit (see fig. 6, element 601) and a transceiver unit (see element 602).].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to merge the UWB communication apparatus of Liu et al. with Verso et al. By relying upon the UWB communication device of Liu et al., which transmits a similar PPDU, Verso et al. may explicitly perform an efficient way of supporting variable data rate in a physical packet header (see Verso, slide 11, bullet 1 and Liu, ¶ 0117) with a reasonable expectation of success.
As per claim 3, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate the data rate of the payload and the second header [Verso, slide 7, Left side Table, The PHR2 rate and the payload rate are the same, implying the information in PHR1 is used for both values.].
As per claim 5, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach wherein the first header is encoded at a data rate which is different than the data rate of the payload indicated by plurality of bits [Verso, slide 7, Left side Table, The data rate of PHR1 (first header) may be transmitted at a rate smaller than the payload rate. See the statis 3.90 Mbps value compared to the increasing payload rate values.].
As per claim 6, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach wherein the second header is encoded at a data rate which is half of the data rate of the payload indicated by the plurality of bits [Verso, slide 7, bullet 2, “PHR2 would be transmitted either at the full 100% rate or at a reduced 50% rate, depending on whether coding scheme used in data mode would be stronger than PHR2 performance, which depends on the advanced coding scheme that will be adopted ”, The PHR2 (second header) rate is 50% of the payload rate (see table on right hand side).].
As per claim 7, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach further comprising selecting, by the first UWB device, the data rate for encoding the payload [Verso, slide 4, Table, The combined values of R2, R1, and R0 correspond to the indicated data rate, which begins at 1.95 Mb/s and concludes at 124.8 Mb/s (with reserved bits for higher values).].
As per claim 8, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 7. Verso et al. also teach wherein the data rate is selected from a range of data rates between 1.95 Mb/s and 124.8 Mb/s [Verso, slide 4, Table, The combined values of R2, R1, and R0 correspond to the indicated data rate, which begins at 1.95 Mb/s and concludes at 124.8 Mb/s (with reserved bits for higher values).].
As per claim 9, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach wherein the second header comprises one or more bits indicating whether the packet is to be used for sensing or ranging [Verso, slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bit 12 on the diagram indicates ranging. In addition, slide 10, bullet 3 contemplates additional fields for ranging, sensing, etc. The slide is titled PHR2 (second header) possibilities).].
As per claim 10, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. also teach wherein the second header comprises one or more bits indicating a payload length of the payload [Slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bits 2-11 of the diagram of PHR2 (second header) indicate the payload length.] and a plurality of parity bits [Slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bits 13-n of the diagram of PHR2 (second header) indicate the parity bits Cn-C0.], wherein a number of the plurality of parity bits is determined according to an 8-bit cyclic redundancy check [Verso, ¶ slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bullet 1 [Wingdings font/0xE0] sub bullet 3, “Consider whether to change from SECDED to a pure error check, e.g., maybe an 8-bit CRC ?”, The concept of parity bits based on 8-bit cyclic redundancy check (CRC) is contemplated.].
As per claim 11, Verso et al. teach a first device comprising:
…a packet including a first header and a second header [Verso, slide 4, bullet 1, “This proposal reduces the overhead of having to send the PHR at the lowest supported rate by splitting the PHR into a rate header (PHR1) sent at a low rate and a main header (PHR2) sent at a high rate”, The UWB physical header (PHR, see slide 2, bullet 5 and slide 3) is split into a first header (PHR1) and a second header (PHR2). See also slide 9 showing an example packet with PHR1 and PHR2.], the first header including a plurality of bits indicating a data rate [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 1, “PHR1 can be very short. Three bits is sufficient to specify all the rates being considered at TG4ab”, PHR1 includes 3 bits to indicate the data rate supported (see slide 4, table).] and an encoding scheme of a payload of the packet [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 2, “ PHR1 can be very short. A fourth bit might be needed to signal LDPC if this affects the modulation of PHR2, otherwise indication of LDPC could be done in PHR2”, A 4-bit PHR1 includes a final bit to indicate whether LDPC (or an encoding scheme) is used.].
Verso et al. do not explicitly teach an ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to: generate a packet…and transmit the packet to a second UWB device.
However, in an analogous art, Liu et al. teach an ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to: generate a packet…and transmit the packet to a second UWB device [Liu, fig. 3, steps 301-303, ¶ 0123, “The transmit end obtains the information bit of the PPDU, and then performs processing based on the information bit of the PPDU and the mapping relationship between a data symbol and a chip sequence, to obtain the modulated symbol. The processing herein may include at least one of the following: mapping from an information bit to a data symbol, mapping from a data symbol to a chip sequence, and modulation. For example, the generating a PPDU shown in step 301 may include generating the modulated symbol of the PPDU”, In step 301, the transmit ends generates a PPDU (see ¶ 0110), where the PPDU includes a structure of a UWB communication (see fig. 4a, ¶s 0117 and 0122). The PPDU is then transmitted to the receive end (see step 302, ¶ 0141). The receive end processes (or decodes) the PPDU (see ¶ 0143). The transmit end and receive end of fig. 3 (see ¶s 0196-0199) each include a processing unit (see fig. 6, element 601) and a transceiver unit (see element 602).].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to merge the UWB communication apparatus of Liu et al. with Verso et al. By relying upon the UWB communication device of Liu et al., which transmits a similar PPDU, Verso et al. may explicitly perform an efficient way of supporting variable data rate in a physical packet header (see Verso, slide 11, bullet 1 and Liu, ¶ 0117) with a reasonable expectation of success.
As per claim 13, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. also teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate the data rate of the payload and the second header [Verso, slide 7, Left side Table, The PHR2 rate and the payload rate are the same, implying the information in PHR1 is used for both values.].
As per claim 15, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. also teach wherein the first header is encoded at a data rate which is different than the data rate of the payload indicated by plurality of bits [Verso, slide 7, Left side Table, The data rate of PHR1 (first header) may be transmitted at a rate smaller than the payload rate. See the statis 3.90 Mbps value compared to the increasing payload rate values.].
As per claim 16, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. also teach wherein the second header is encoded at a data rate which is half of the data rate of the payload indicated by the plurality of bits [Verso, slide 7, bullet 2, “PHR2 would be transmitted either at the full 100% rate or at a reduced 50% rate, depending on whether coding scheme used in data mode would be stronger than PHR2 performance, which depends on the advanced coding scheme that will be adopted ”, The PHR2 (second header) rate is 50% of the payload rate (see table on right hand side).].
As per claim 17, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. also teach wherein the UWB transceiver is further configured to select the data rate for encoding the payload [Verso, slide 4, Table, The combined values of R2, R1, and R0 correspond to the indicated data rate, which begins at 1.95 Mb/s and concludes at 124.8 Mb/s (with reserved bits for higher values).].
As per claim 18, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 17. Verso et al. also teach wherein the data rate is selected from a range of data rates between 1.95 Mb/s and 124.8 Mb/s [Verso, slide 4, Table, The combined values of R2, R1, and R0 correspond to the indicated data rate, which begins at 1.95 Mb/s and concludes at 124.8 Mb/s (with reserved bits for higher values).].
As per claim 19, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 10. Verso et al. also teach wherein the second header comprises one or more first bits indicating whether the packet is to be used for sensing or ranging [Verso, slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bit 12 on the diagram indicates ranging. In addition, slide 10, bullet 3 contemplates additional fields for ranging, sensing, etc. The slide is titled PHR2 (second header) possibilities).], one or more second bits indicating a payload length of the payload, and a plurality of parity bits [Slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bits 13-n of the diagram of PHR2 (second header) indicate the parity bits Cn-C0.], wherein a number of the plurality of parity bits is determined according to an 8-bit cyclic redundancy check [Verso, ¶ slide 8, “PHR2 Possibilities”, Bullet 1 [Wingdings font/0xE0] sub bullet 3, “Consider whether to change from SECDED to a pure error check, e.g., maybe an 8-bit CRC ?”, The concept of parity bits based on 8-bit cyclic redundancy check (CRC) is contemplated.].
As per claim 20, Verso et al. teach a first ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver comprising:
…a packet including a first header and a second header [Verso, slide 4, bullet 1, “This proposal reduces the overhead of having to send the PHR at the lowest supported rate by splitting the PHR into a rate header (PHR1) sent at a low rate and a main header (PHR2) sent at a high rate”, The UWB physical header (PHR, see slide 2, bullet 5 and slide 3) is split into a first header (PHR1) and a second header (PHR2). See also slide 9 showing an example packet with PHR1 and PHR2.], the first header including a plurality of bits indicating a data rate [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 1, “PHR1 can be very short. Three bits is sufficient to specify all the rates being considered at TG4ab”, PHR1 includes 3 bits to indicate the data rate supported (see slide 4, table).] and an encoding scheme of a payload of the packet [Verso, slide 4, bullet 2 + sub-bullet 2, “ PHR1 can be very short. A fourth bit might be needed to signal LDPC if this affects the modulation of PHR2, otherwise indication of LDPC could be done in PHR2”, A 4-bit PHR1 includes a final bit to indicate whether LDPC (or an encoding scheme) is used.].
Verso et al. do not explicitly teach one or more processors configured to: receive, from a second UWB transceiver, a packet…and decode the packet according to the encoding scheme and the data rate.
However, in an analogous art, Liu et al. teach one or more processors configured to: receive, from a second UWB transceiver, a packet…and decode the packet according to the encoding scheme and the data rate [Liu, fig. 3, steps 301-303, ¶ 0123, “The transmit end obtains the information bit of the PPDU, and then performs processing based on the information bit of the PPDU and the mapping relationship between a data symbol and a chip sequence, to obtain the modulated symbol. The processing herein may include at least one of the following: mapping from an information bit to a data symbol, mapping from a data symbol to a chip sequence, and modulation. For example, the generating a PPDU shown in step 301 may include generating the modulated symbol of the PPDU”, In step 301, the transmit ends generates a PPDU (see ¶ 0110), where the PPDU includes a structure of a UWB communication (see fig. 4a, ¶s 0117 and 0122). The PPDU is then transmitted to the receive end (see step 302, ¶ 0141). The receive end processes (or decodes) the PPDU (see ¶ 0143). The transmit end and receive end of fig. 3 (see ¶s 0196-0199) each include a processing unit (see fig. 6, element 601) and a transceiver unit (see element 602).].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to merge the UWB communication apparatus of Liu et al. with Verso et al. By relying upon the UWB communication device of Liu et al., which transmits a similar PPDU, Verso et al. may explicitly perform an efficient way of supporting variable data rate in a physical packet header (see Verso, slide 11, bullet 1 and Liu, ¶ 0117) with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 2, 4, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verso et al. (NPL U cited on pg. 2 of PTO-892, doc: 15-22-0467-01-04ab dated 9/22/2025) in view of Liu et al. (US PG Pub 2025/0119238) and Akhavan et al. (NPL X on pg. 1 of PTO-892 dated 9/22/2025, IEEE 802.15-22-0296-00-04ab).
As per claim 2, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate whether low density parity check (LDPC) or constraint length 7 (CL7) encoding scheme is used by the first UWB device.
However, in an analogous art, Akhavan et al. teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate whether low density parity check (LDPC) or constraint length 7 (CL7) encoding scheme is used by the first UWB device [Akhavan, slide 12, bullets 1 and 2, “While we understand the benefits of LDPC codes, there are also added complexity and area cost. The required SNR margin between CL7-coded PHR and LDPC-coded Payload may become very narrow or even negative”, Slide 14 also shows to support CL7 as the baseline, with LDPC support being offered as well, which would be used to support the 124.8 Mbps rate (see slide 17).].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the LDPC/CL7 functionality and solutions of Akhavan et al. into the combined system of Verso et al. (see bit C1, allowing to toggle LDPC and thus allow for another value) and Liu et al. One would have been motivated to do this, because coding gain is influential in PER and link budgeting (see Akhavan, slides 7 and 13) and would improve system performance with a reasonable expectation of success.
As per claim 4, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the method of claim 1. Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the packet includes two repetitions of the first header and the second header.
However, in an analogous art, Akhavan et al. teach wherein the packet includes two repetitions of the first header and the second header [Akhavan, slide 12, bullet 3, “As such PHR may need additional protection, e.g., symbol repetition”, When contemplating the SNR margin and complexity of LDPC vs. CL7 (see bullets 1 and 2), the concept of PHR repetition is disclosed as a solution].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the LDPC/CL7 functionality and solutions of Akhavan et al. into the combined system of Verso et al. and Liu et al. One would have been motivated to do this, because coding gain is influential in PER and link budgeting (see Akhavan, slides 7 and 13) and would improve system performance with a reasonable expectation of success.
As per claim 12, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate whether low density parity check (LDPC) or constraint length 7 (CL7) encoding scheme is used by the first device.
However, in an analogous art, Akhavan et al. teach wherein the plurality of bits indicate whether low density parity check (LDPC) or constraint length 7 (CL7) encoding scheme is used by the first device [Akhavan, slide 12, bullets 1 and 2, “While we understand the benefits of LDPC codes, there are also added complexity and area cost. The required SNR margin between CL7-coded PHR and LDPC-coded Payload may become very narrow or even negative”, Slide 14 also shows to support CL7 as the baseline, with LDPC support being offered as well, which would be used to support the 124.8 Mbps rate (see slide 17).].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the LDPC/CL7 functionality and solutions of Akhavan et al. into the combined system of Verso et al. (see bit C1, allowing to toggle LDPC and thus allow for another value) and Liu et al. One would have been motivated to do this, because coding gain is influential in PER and link budgeting (see Akhavan, slides 7 and 13) and would improve system performance with a reasonable expectation of success.
As per claim 14, Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. teach the first device of claim 11. Verso et al. in view of Liu et al. do not explicitly teach wherein the packet includes two repetitions of the first header and the second header.
However, in an analogous art, Akhavan et al. teach wherein the packet includes two repetitions of the first header and the second header [Akhavan, slide 12, bullet 3, “As such PHR may need additional protection, e.g., symbol repetition”, When contemplating the SNR margin and complexity of LDPC vs. CL7 (see bullets 1 and 2), the concept of PHR repetition is disclosed as a solution].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the LDPC/CL7 functionality and solutions of Akhavan et al. into the combined system of Verso et al. and Liu et al. One would have been motivated to do this, because coding gain is influential in PER and link budgeting (see Akhavan, slides 7 and 13) and would improve system performance with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul H. Masur whose telephone number is (571)270-7297. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 4:30 AM to 5PM.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at (571) 270-3667. 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.
/Paul H. Masur/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights