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 .
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 1-2, 9 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gallagher (7,079,009).
Regarding claim 1, Gallagher discloses an apparatus for communication comprising: a transmitter (i.e. an RFID reader or an interrogator), configurable to transmit an upcoming message to a target receiver and operatively coupled to a transmit resonant circuit having a transmit frequency of resonance (See col. 1 lines 37-46, col. 5 lines 3-18); a first resonant circuit (i.e. one of a plurality of transponders) having: a first frequency of resonance, a tuned state, in which the first frequency of resonance is the transmit frequency of resonance, and a detuned state, in which the first frequency of resonance is separated from the transmit frequency of resonance by a first frequency offset; a first receiver, operatively coupled to the first resonant circuit and configurable to place the first resonant circuit into the detuned state in response to at least one of a communication protocol and a received message (i.e. MC1, MC2) indicating that the first receiver is not the target of an upcoming message (i.e. read/write transactions), and to place the first resonant circuit into the tuned state when the first receiver is the target of the upcoming message (See col. 1 lines 37-46, col. 5 lines 23-34, col. 5 lines 41-51); a second resonant circuit (i.e. the other one of the plurality of transponders) having: a second frequency of resonance, a tuned state, in which the second frequency of resonance is the transmit frequency of resonance, and a detuned state, in which the second frequency of resonance is separated from the transmit frequency of resonance by a second frequency offset; and a second receiver, operatively coupled to the second resonant circuit and configurable to place the second resonant circuit into the detuned state in response to at least one of a communication protocol and a received message (i.e. MC1, MC2) indicating that the second receiver is not the target of the upcoming message, and to place the second resonant circuit into the tuned state when the second receiver is the target of the upcoming message (See col. 1 lines 37-46, col. 5 lines 23-34, col. 5 lines 41-51), the upcoming message (i.e. read/write transactions) targeted to at least one of the first receiver and the second receiver (See col. 5 lines 28-34), and the transmit resonant circuit, the first resonant circuit, and the second resonant circuit inductively coupled (See col. 1 lines 37-46).
Claim 12 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, as method.
Regarding claim 2, Gallagher discloses as cited in claim 1. Gallagher further discloses the communication protocol is at least one of round-robin, time-division, and time-slotted protocols (See col. 5 lines 3-18, lines 23-24).
Claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 2, as method.
Regarding claim 9, Gallagher discloses as cited in claim 1. Gallagher further discloses one or more of the transmitter, first receiver, and second receiver further comprising a transceiver (See col. 5 lines 23-28).
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 3-7, 10-11 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher (7,079,009).
Regarding claims 3-4, Gallagher discloses as cited in 1. However, Gallagher does not explicitly mention that at least one of the transmit resonant circuit, the first resonant circuit, and the second resonant circuit comprises an inductive element (i.e. inductor) and a capacitive element (i.e. capacitor). Since resonant circuit of an interrogator (i.e. RFID reader) or a transponder (i.e. RFID tag) comprising inductor (i.e. variable or fixed inductor) and capacitor (i.e. variable or fixed capacitor) is commonly known in the art (Official Notice taken by the examiner); therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize such resonant circuit, for the advantage of expanding the capability of the system to various types of resonant circuits.
Claims 14-15 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 3-4, as method.
Regarding claim 5, Gallagher discloses as cited in 1. However, Gallagher does not explicitly mention that at least one of the first frequency offset and the second frequency offset is a fixed value. Since utilizing predetermined frequency offset value (i.e. fixed value), or real-time dynamic frequency offset value is merely a design choice; therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize fixed frequency offset value, for the advantage of providing greater flexibility to accommodate the design intention.
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 5, as method.
Regarding claims 6-7, Gallagher discloses as cited in 1. However, Gallagher does not explicitly mention that at least one of the first frequency offset and the second frequency offset is determined, at least in part, by an estimate of communication channel quality such as bit error rate (BER). Since Gallagher does suggest that the frequency offset is determined to avoid/reduce interference and/or data collisions resulting corrupted information (See col. 2 lines 12-19, col. 5 lines 41-47), wherein the relationship between signal interference and channel quality such as received signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio, BER, or PER is commonly known in the art; therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the system as disclosed by Gallagher for determining frequency offset by an estimate of communication channel quality such as bit error rate (BER), for the advantage of providing greater flexibility to determine frequency offset for detuning.
Claims 17-18 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 6-7, as method.
Regarding claims 10-11, Gallagher discloses as cited in 1. However, Gallagher does not explicitly mention that the transmitter is configurable to transmit phase-shift keying modulation (PSK) or binary phase-shift keying modulation (BPSK). Since RFID system, such as the system disclosed by Gallagher (See Abstract), adopting ASK, FSK, PSK, or BPSK modulation is well known in the art (Official Notice taken by the examiner); therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize such modulation, for the advantage of expanding the capability of the system to various types of modulations to accommodate the design intention.
Claims 19-20 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 10-11, as method.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallagher (7,079,009) in view of Charvat (9,915,725).
Regarding claim 8, Gallagher discloses as cited in claim 1. However, Gallagher does not explicitly mention that the transmit resonant circuit is at a first semiconductor die and at least one of the first resonant circuit and the second resonant circuit is at a second semiconductor die. Since mounting interrogator circuitry (i.e. transmit resonant circuit) or transponder circuitry (i.e. first resonant circuit or the second resonant circuit) on semiconductor die is known in the art as suggested by Charvat (See fig. 5B and col. 31 lines 30-40); therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize such feature, as suggested by Charvat, for the interrogator/transponder of the RFID system of Gallagher, for the advantage of providing flexibility in circuit packaging.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
See PTO-892 for a listing of cited prior arts of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN A TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7858. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/TUAN A TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648