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
The Amendment filed 01/05/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-15 and 21-22 are pending in the application. Claims 16-20 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed on 01/05/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 6 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection of claim 6 is made in view of Park (US20210384961A1).
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 limitation(s) is/are:
“first device” performing the functions of switching and sending as recited in claims 1 and 6.
“second device” performing the function of receiving a sensing signal sent by a first device as recited in claims 6-10. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the claimed receiving a sensing signal is a transceiver (paragraph [0045]: “The first device may be a network device, the second device 12 may be a target or a reflective device. Further, the above network framework also includes a terminal 13, or, in the case that the second device 12 is the reflective device, the network framework also includes a target as shown in FIG. 2, and the target may be called a target object”)
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 § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims and 1 and 6 recites a “first device” which is used to perform the function of switching, a main lobe direction of a transmission beam from a first direction to a second direction, and sending a sensing signal, which invokes 112(f). However, the corresponding structure/algorithm to perform the function of extracting is not described in the specification and thereby fails to comply with the written description requirement. Claims 2-5, 7-9 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1 and 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 6 recites the limitation, “switching, by a first device, a main lobe direction of a transmission beam from a first direction to a second direction, and sending a sensing signal” which invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure does not provide any corresponding structure/algorithm in order to implement the extracting performed by the first computing device. It is noted the term “device” is considered to be a nonce term. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the processor-readable storage medium" in line 2; and “the processor” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It is unclear if “the processor-readable storage medium" refers to the “non-transitory processor-readable storage medium” or if it is a separate element within the claim. For examination purposes the examiner will interpret "the processor-readable storage medium" in line 2 to read as “the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium”; and “the processor” in line 3 to read as “a processor”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the processor-readable storage medium" in line 2; and “the processor” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It is unclear if “the processor-readable storage medium" refers to the “non-transitory processor-readable storage medium” or if it is a separate element within the claim. For examination purposes the examiner will interpret "the processor-readable storage medium" in line 2 to read as “the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium”; and “the processor” in line 3 to read as “a processor”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
(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 was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 6, 14 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park (US20210384961A1).
Regarding claim 6 Park discloses A target sensing method, comprising: receiving, by a second device, a sensing signal sent by a first device (Para 0041: “According to an embodiment, if the direction of the main lobe 11 or the direction of the main lobe 12 is substantially aligned with a direction of the RF signal 101, the electronic device 100 may sense the RF signal 101. The electronic device 100 may determine the direction of the sensed RF signal 101 and may receive the RF signal 101.“) ; wherein, the sensing signal is a sensing signal sent by the first device by switching a main lobe direction of a transmission beam from a first direction to a second direction (Para 0040: “According to an embodiment, the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 may form a specified angle. The electronic device 100 may change directions of the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12, which form the specified angle, in order to sense the RF signal 101. In an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may change a direction of the beam including the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 by a specified angle each time.”); wherein, the second direction is a direction that the main lobe direction of the transmission beam of the first device is aligned with the second device (Para 0101: “ According to an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may track a direction of an RF signal while changing the direction of the beam by a specified angle each time as described above. According to various embodiments, the specified angle may be set to various values. If the specified angle is relatively large, the electronic device 100 may change the direction of the beam at a relatively higher speed. If the specified angle is relatively small, the electronic device 100 may track the direction of the RF signal relatively more precisely.”), the first direction is different from the second direction (Para 0130: “In operation 805a, the electronic device may sense an RF signal from at least one of the main lobe or the grating lobe. In an embodiment, the electronic device may perform beam sweeping using the first reception beam. For example, the electronic device may change the directions of the main lobe and the grating lobe by a specified angle each time and may track the RF signal. It may be necessary for the electronic device to distinguish whether the RF signal has been sensed through the main lobe or the grating lobe in order to accurately sense the direction of the sensed RF signal.”).
Claims 14 and 22 recites limitations that are similar to those of claim 6, therefore claims 14 and 22 are rejected under the same rationale.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US20210384961A1) in view of Kang (US20200015228A1).
Regarding claim 10 Park discloses all the limitations of claim 6. Park does not teach “receiving, by the second device, configuration information sent by the first device, wherein the configuration information includes at least one of the following: a time-frequency resource position of the sensing signal, waveform information of the sensing signal, configuration information of the second device, and configuration information for the second device to feedback the sensing information “
However, Kang teaches: receiving, by the second device(Para 0002: “The present disclosure relates to a wireless communication system, and more particularly, to a method for measuring and reporting channel state information (CSI) and a device for supporting the same.”), configuration information sent by the first device, wherein the configuration information includes at least one of the following: a time-frequency resource position of the sensing signal, waveform information of the sensing signal, configuration information of the second device, and configuration information for the second device to feedback the sensing information(Para 0009: “In a method of reporting, by a user equipment, channel state information (CSI) in a wireless communication system according to an embodiment of the present disclosure, the method includes receiving, from a base station, CSI configuration information related to a CSI reporting procedure, wherein the CSI configuration information includes information indicating one or more measurement settings, information indicating a plurality of reporting settings, and information indicating a plurality of resource settings, receiving, from the base station, reporting information indicating at least one reporting setting of the plurality of reporting settings, and receiving, from the base station, resource information indicating at least one resource set or at least one resource belonging to a specific resource group related to the at least one reporting setting, wherein the specific resource group is configured based on an operation mode on a time domain which is configured for the at least one reporting setting within the plurality of resource settings.”).
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park with Kang to incorporate the feature of: sending, by the first device, configuration information to the second device, wherein the configuration information includes at least one of the following: a transmission resource location of the sensing signal, waveform information of the sensing signal, configuration information of the second device, or configuration information for the second device to feedback sensing information. Park with Kang are all considered analogous arts as they all disclose the use of wireless technology for communication and sensing. However, Park fails to disclose a feature of communication nodes sending configuration information. This feature is disclosed by Kang. It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Park with Kang to incorporate the feature of: sending, by the first device, configuration information to the second device, wherein the configuration information includes at least one of the following: a transmission resource location of the sensing signal, waveform information of the sensing signal, configuration information of the second device, or configuration information for the second device to feedback sensing information as such a feature would increase the efficiency of the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 15 and 21 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 1 Park discloses: A signal sending method (Para 0041: “According to an embodiment, if the direction of the main lobe 11 or the direction of the main lobe 12 is substantially aligned with a direction of the RF signal 101, the electronic device 100 may sense the RF signal 101. The electronic device 100 may determine the direction of the sensed RF signal 101 and may receive the RF signal 101.“), comprising: switching, by a first device, a main lobe direction of a transmission beam from a first direction to a second direction, and sending a sensing (Para 0040: “According to an embodiment, the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 may form a specified angle. The electronic device 100 may change directions of the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12, which form the specified angle, in order to sense the RF signal 101. In an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may change a direction of the beam including the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 by a specified angle each time.”; wherein, the second direction is a direction that the main lobe direction of the transmission beam of the first device is aligned with the second device (Para 0101: “ According to an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may track a direction of an RF signal while changing the direction of the beam by a specified angle each time as described above. According to various embodiments, the specified angle may be set to various values. If the specified angle is relatively large, the electronic device 100 may change the direction of the beam at a relatively higher speed. If the specified angle is relatively small, the electronic device 100 may track the direction of the RF signal relatively more precisely.”), the first direction is different from the second direction (Para 0130: “In operation 805a, the electronic device may sense an RF signal from at least one of the main lobe or the grating lobe. In an embodiment, the electronic device may perform beam sweeping using the first reception beam. For example, the electronic device may change the directions of the main lobe and the grating lobe by a specified angle each time and may track the RF signal. It may be necessary for the electronic device to distinguish whether the RF signal has been sensed through the main lobe or the grating lobe in order to accurately sense the direction of the sensed RF signal.”); after sending the sensing signal, switching, by the first device, the main lobe direction of the transmission beam from the second direction to the first direction or a third direction, and the third direction is different from the second direction.
Claims 2-5 and 21 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1.
Regarding claim 15 Park discloses all the limitations of claim 14 wherein the processor is further configured to: reflect the sensing signal; receive an echo signal generated by a target; detect the target according to the sensing signal received by the second device and the echo signal received by the second device.
In reference to dependent claim 15, the prior arts made of record individually or in any combination, failed to teach, render obvious, or fairly suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the combination of the claimed features of claim 15. Specifically, the prior arts made of record fail to disclose the limitation: “wherein the processor is further configured to: reflect the sensing signal; receive an echo signal generated by a target; detect the target according to the sensing signal received by the second device and the echo signal received by the second device. “ .
Claims 11-13 are allowed.
Regarding claim 11 Park discloses: A device, being a first device, comprising: a memory, a transceiver, and a processor, wherein: the memory is used to store computer programs; the transceiver is used to send and receive data under the control of the processor(Para 0010: “Furthermore, an electronic device according to another embodiment of the present disclosure may be characterized by including a housing, a wireless communication circuit configured to transmit and/or receive a signal having a first wavelength using beamforming, and an antenna array arranged inside the housing and/or at a portion thereof and electrically connected to the wireless communication circuit”); the processor is used to read the computer programs in the memory and perform the following operations: switching a main lobe direction of a transmission beam from a first direction to a second direction , and sending a sensing signal (Para 0040: “ According to an embodiment, the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 may form a specified angle. The electronic device 100 may change directions of the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12, which form the specified angle, in order to sense the RF signal 101. In an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may change a direction of the beam including the main lobe 11 and the grating lobe 12 by a specified angle each time..”); wherein, the second direction is a direction that the main lobe direction of the transmission beam of the first device is aligned with the second device(Para 0101: “ According to an embodiment, the electronic device 100 may track a direction of an RF signal while changing the direction of the beam by a specified angle each time as described above. According to various embodiments, the specified angle may be set to various values. If the specified angle is relatively large, the electronic device 100 may change the direction of the beam at a relatively higher speed. If the specified angle is relatively small, the electronic device 100 may track the direction of the RF signal relatively more precisely.”), the first direction is different from the second direction (Para 0130: “In operation 805a, the electronic device may sense an RF signal from at least one of the main lobe or the grating lobe. In an embodiment, the electronic device may perform beam sweeping using the first reception beam. For example, the electronic device may change the directions of the main lobe and the grating lobe by a specified angle each time and may track the RF signal. It may be necessary for the electronic device to distinguish whether the RF signal has been sensed through the main lobe or the grating lobe in order to accurately sense the direction of the sensed RF signal.”); after sending the sensing signal, switching the main lobe direction of the transmission beam from the second direction to the first direction or a third direction, and the third direction is different from the second direction.
Claims 12-13 are also allowed due to their dependency on allowed claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bongani J. Mashele whose telephone number is (703)756-5861. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00AM-5:00PM (CT).
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 Resha H. Desai, can be reached on 571-270-7792. 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.
/BONGANI JABULANI MASHELE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights