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 .
This action is in response to applicant’s remarks/arguments filed on 12/26/2025. Claims 6 has been amended. Claims 9, 11, 14, 18-19 and 24 have been cancelled. Claim 26 has been added. Currently, claims 1-8, 10, 12-13, 15-17, 20-23 and 25-26 are pending. This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments/remarks filed 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Pinarello “does not disclose: ‘determining a maximum amount of distortion allowed to be contributed by the PA and by the DAC while meeting the transmit signal quality requirement’,” and states that the claim requires determining “for each of the PA and the DAC, the maximum distortion allowed to be contributed by each component.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s argument based on “for each of the PA and the DAC” is considered moot as claim 1 does not require it as written; claim 1 does not require computing separate numeric maximum for PA and DAC.
Pinarello, in par [0023] and [0032], discloses measuring output-signal parameters and determining a measured signal quality, then comparing that measured signal quality to a predetermined threshold S.sub.TH stored in memory; and further explains that when measured signal quality exceeds S.sub.TH, transmission quality is unacceptable and corrective action is taken (par [0026]). Additionally, Pinarello also discloses S.sub.TH may be set below system specification to avoid violating communication requirements (par [0075]). In operation, S.sub.TH therefore serves as the controlling quality limit that the transmitter must satisfy, i.e., the maximum permissible impairment level consistent with meeting the transmit signal quality requirement (par [0026], [0032] and [0075]).
Applicant also argues that Pinarello does not determine maximum distortion “for each of” the PA and DAC. However, claim 1 does not require separate numerical maximum for the PA and the DAC. Pinarello discloses controlling operation points of the PA and other transmission-chain elements including the DAC based on the common measured-signal-quality comparison to S.sub.TH (par [0033]-[0034]), and further teaches signal quality may be evaluated using distortion-related behavior such as AM/AM and AM/PM distortion introduced by the PA (par [0036]). Thus, Pinarello teaches the PA/DAC operation to remain within the allowable quality limit, as claimed, (see par [0032]-[0034] and [0036]).
Regarding claim 1, applicant further argues Pinarello does not disclose: “jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DA… while improving a secondary objective of the radio transmitter”, and states that “there is nothing in Pinarello indicating that the (i) adjustment are performed jointly among the PA and the DAC and (ii) the adjustments are performed until the amount of distortion… is below the maximum amount of distortion allowed. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Pinarello, in par [0031], describes a transmission chain including multiple components (e.g. a modulation circuit 208, one or more filters 210, and a power amplifier 206… maybe also comprising wide range of additional elements); and teaches a control circuit that adjusts operating points of transmission-chain elements, including explicitly the PA active area and, other elements such as DAC (par [0033]-[0034]). Additionally, in par [0035], Pinarello teaches a stepwise/iterative adjustment process until measured signal quality is less than or equal to S.sub.TH, and coordinated adjustment of PA and DAC under the same measured-quality/threshold reasonably meet “jointly adapting,” and the claim does not require simultaneous changes or particular optimization routine (par [0033]-[0035]).
Also, in par [0035], Pinarello teaches adjusting operating point(s) until measured signal quality is less than or equal to S.sub.TH; and measured signal quality may be determined using PA distortion behavior (AM/AM and AM/PM) (see par [0036]). Maintaining measured signal quality at or below S.sub.TH therefore corresponds to maintaining distortion/impairment within the allowable limit used to meet the transmit signal quality requirement (par [0035]-[0036]).
Furthermore, Pinarello repeatedly frames the adjustment as improving efficiency/current consumption while preserving transmission quality. For example, in par [0025] and [0028], Pinarello teaches minimizing current consumption while maintaining sufficient signal quality and driving active area to an optimized value that reduces current consumption. In par [0076]-[0078], Pinarello further teaches stepwise reduction of operating point to decrease current/power consumption while keeping measured signal quality within the threshold. This reasonably reads on improving objective subject to the signal quality constraint.
Therefore, Pinarello discloses the claimed limitations in question for claim 1 and the rejection is maintained.
Regarding claim 3, applicant argues that the cited paragraphs “do not disclose determining a distortion contribution by one or more non-configurable components,” and by stating that “there is not mention of non-configurable component or determining the maximum amount of distortion based… on the distortion contribution of said non-configurable components.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s argument is based on that Pinarello must literally label blocks “non-configurable components” or output separate numeric contributions, however, claim 3 does not require those express labels or separate numeric outputs.
Pinarello, in par [0031], clearly defines multiple transmission-chain components: “the transmission chain 204 comprising a modulation circuit 208, one or more filters 210, and a power amplifier 206… maybe also comprising wide range of additional elements.” The “modulation circuit 208 and additional elements” within the transmission chain 204 would be read as the “non-configurable components” as Pinarello does not configure them for distortion adjustment. Additionally, Pinarello determines measured signal quality at the transmitter output and compares it to S.sub.TH (par [0032]-[0033]), and further discloses that the measured signal quality maybe evaluated using distortion-related characteristic including AM/AM and AM/PM distortion introduced by PA (par [0036]). The transmitter includes the multiple transmission chain components, and the measured output signal quality necessarily reflects the aggregate impairment present at the output at the time of measurement (par [0031]-[0033]).
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim does not require expressly labeling components as “non-configurable,” nor does it require outputting a separate numeric distortion value for each such component. Pinarello’s approach – measuring overall output signal quality and then adjusting configurable elements until measured signal quality satisfies S.sub.TH – accounts for the distortion/impairment already present in the chain as reflected in the measured signal quality relative to the threshold (par [0032]-[0035]). Thus, the allowable distortion/impairment consistent with the transmit signal quality requirement (enforced by S.sub.TH) is determined in dependence on the distortion/impairment present in the transmitter chain, as required.
Therefore, Pinarello discloses the claimed limitation in question for claim 3 and the rejection is maintained.
Regarding claim 15, applicant Pinarello does not disclose “tabulated data of the PA” and that there is “no mention of tabulated data or anything related.”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. This argument is based on an unstated requirement that the reference must literally use the words “tabulated data.” However, claim 15 does not require that label.
Pinarello, in par [0032]-[0035], discloses an algorithm stored in memory for determining measured signal quality and comparing it to S.sub.TH, and incrementally adjusting PA operating configuration (including active area) based on the measured signal quality results; and further discloses signal quality may be evaluated using distortion-related behavior of the PA (AM/AM and PM/PM) (see par [0036]).
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, “tabulated data” is not limited to a literal table explicitly labeled as such, and includes stored control data/parameters used by control logic to select among different PA hardware configurations while keeping measured signal quality within the predetermined limit (par [0032]-[0036]). Pinarello’s memory-based control that iteratively select among PA configurations and evaluates measured signal quality (including distortion-based evaluation) relative to S.sub.TH meets the limitation of adapting the PA based on stored data corresponding to distortion/quality behavior across different PA configurations (par [0032]-[0036]).
Therefore, Pinarello discloses the claimed limitation in question for claim 15 and the rejection is maintained.
Regarding independent claim 25 and other remaining dependent claims, see response above.
Regarding new claim 26, see detailed rejection below.
Response to Amendment
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 10, 12-13, 15-17, 20, 21, 23 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1).
Consider claim 1, Pinarello discloses a method for jointly adapting hardware configurations of a power amplifier (PA) and a digital to analog converter (DAC) in a radio transmitter (read as control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the PA 206 (active area) and also adjusts the DAC 212 (gain/operating point vis DAC voltage), which corresponding to jointly adapting hardware configurations of a PA and a DCA in the transmitter shown in figure 2, par [0033]-[0034], figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]), the method comprising:
obtaining a transmit signal quality requirement for an upcoming radio transmission (read as using a predetermined quality threshold value S.sub.TH, which sets relative system specification to avoid standard violation, as the criterion for acceptable transmission quality, figure 2, par [0033] and [0075]);
determining a maximum amount of distortion allowed to be contributed by the PA and by the DAC while meeting the transmit signal quality requirement (read as evaluates output quality using distortion-based metrics (AM/AM, AM/PM) and controls operation so measured quality is less than or equal to S.sub.TH (where S.sub.TH is set to avoid standard violations), S.sub.TH functions as the maximum permissible impairment/distortion limit consistent with meeting the transmit signal quality requirement, figure 2, par [0035]-[0036] and [0075]); and
jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DAC to generate an amount of distortion below the maximum amount of distortion, while improving a secondary objective of the radio transmitter (read as control circuit 216 jointly adjusts PA 206 (active area) and DAC 212 (gain/operating point) and iteratively drives measured quality to be less than or equal to S.sub.TH, which keeping distortion/impairment within the allowed limit while improving the secondary object of reduced current/power consumption, par [0033]-[0035], par [0073] and [0076]-[0077]).).
Consider claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses obtaining a relationship between hardware configuration and corresponding contributed distortion for the PA and for the DAC, wherein the hardware configurations are jointly adapted based on the obtained relationship between hardware configurations and corresponding contributed distortions (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses determining a distortion contribution by one or more non-configurable components in the radio transmitter, where the maximum amount of distortion is determined in dependence of the distortion contribution by the one or more non-configurable components and the transmit signal quality requirement (read as measures output signal quality (including distortion-based evaluation) at the transmitter output for a chain including multiple elements (e.g. modulation circuit 208, one or more filters 210, and a power amplifier 206… maybe also comprising wide range of additional elements”, and the “modulation circuit 208 and additional elements” within the transmission chain 204 would be read as the “non-configurable components” as Pinarello does not configure them for distortion adjustment) and then adjust configurable elements (filters, DAC and/or PA) until measured quality is less than or equal to S.sub.TH, the allowable impairment for meeting the transmit signal quality requirement (S.sub.TH) is determined in dependence on the aggregate chain impairment reflected in the measured output quality under the broadest reasonable interpretation, figure 2, par [0031] and [0033]-[0036]).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses where the secondary objective comprises any of an energy consumption of the radio transmitter, a data throughput of the radio transmission, an output power of the radio transmission, a spectral efficiency of the radio transmission, and an adjacent channel leakage ratio, ACLR, of the upcoming radio transmission (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]; additionally, the adjacent channel leakage ratio (ACLR) can be measured and used as an indicator of the signal quality (e.g., a low ACLR indicates a high signal quality and a high ACLR indicates a low signal quality), par [0036]).
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the hardware configuration of the PA comprises a bias and/or an input power (read as control circuit 304 may be further configured to control a bias circuit 306 configured to provide a bias voltage or a bias current to the power amplifier 302. The controllable bias circuit 306 provides for adaptive bias control in combination with adaptive active area control., figures 2 and 3, par [0038]).
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the hardware configurations are jointly adapted while meeting a minimum requirement of a tertiary objective, and the tertiary objective comprises: an energy consumption of the radio transmitter, a data throughput of the upcoming radio transmission, an output power of the upcoming radio transmission, a spectral efficiency of the upcoming radio transmission, and/or an ACLR of the upcoming radio transmission (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]; additionally, the adjacent channel leakage ratio (ACLR) can be measured and used as an indicator of the signal quality (e.g., a low ACLR indicates a high signal quality and a high ACLR indicates a low signal quality), par [0036]).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the PA comprises adapting of the hardware configuration of the PA based on a behavior model of the PA, wherein the behavioral model of the PA models distortion contribution by the PA in dependence of the hardware configuration (read as the control circuit 216 may also be coupled to other elements (e.g., filter 210, DAC 212, etc.) in the transmission chain 204 and using algorithm, to dynamically adjust the operating point of the other elements (PA 206 and/or DAC 212); the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH, par [0023] and [0032]-[0033]).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the DAC comprises adapting of the hardware configuration of the DAC based on a behavior model of the DAC, the behavioral model of the DAC models distortion contribution by the DAC in dependence of the hardware configuration, and any of the behavioral models is further dependent on a signal characteristic of the upcoming radio transmission (read as the control circuit 216 may also be coupled to other elements (e.g., filter 210, DAC 212, etc.) in the transmission chain 204 and using algorithm, to dynamically adjust the operating point of the other elements (PA 206 and/or DAC 212); the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH, par [0023] and [0032]-[0033]).
Consider claim 15, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the adapting of the hardware configuration of the PA is based on tabulated data of the PA, wherein the tabulated data of the PA comprises distortion contribution by the PA for different hardware configurations (read as the adapts the PA hardware configuration by selecting different active-cell combination using a stored/structured control word delivered to selection 504 (yielding different PA configurations with different behaviors), and evaluates output quality using PA-introduced distortion (AM/AM, AM/PM), which constitutes “tabulated”/stored configuration data comprising PA distortion/quality contribution across different PA hardware configuration under the broadest reasonable interpretation, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the adapting of the hardware configuration of the DAC is based on tabulated data of the DAC, wherein the tabulated data of the DAC comprises distortion contribution by the DAC for different hardware configurations (read as the quality of the output signal may be measured indirectly, by evaluating the AM/AM and AM/PM distortion introduced by the power amplifier (which is the output circuit of transmission chain 204 having power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) to meet the value of predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH which having an corresponding distortion amount value as a max limit, and the inputs of power amplifier 206 are based on the outputs of controllable DAC 212 within the transmission chain 204, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 17, as applied to claim 15 above, Pinarello discloses wherein any of the tabulated data is further dependent on a signal characteristic of the upcoming radio transmission, any of the tabulated data is dynamically updated based on a feedback signal from the radio transmitter, or any of the tabulated data is dynamically updated based on a feedback signal from a remote radio transceiver arranged to communicate with the radio transmitter (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT (i.e. feedback) and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 20, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the method further comprises adapting the hardware configuration of the PA based on a feedback signal from the radio transmitter, wherein the feedback signal comprises a current transmit signal quality (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT (i.e. feedback) and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 21, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein the method further comprises adapting the hardware configuration of the DAC based on a feedback signal from the ratio transmitter, wherein the feedback signal comprises a current transmit signal quality (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT (i.e. feedback) and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Consider claim 23, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program comprising program code means for performing the method of claim 1 (read as memory 218, figure 2, par [0032]).
Consider claim 25, Pinarello discloses a control unit for jointly adapting hardware configurations of a power amplifier (PA) and a digital to analog converter (DAC) in a radio transmitter (read as control circuit 216 is configured to measure parameters of the signal S.sub.OUT output from the power amplifier 206 and to evaluate a measured signal quality for controlling the DCA 212 and power amplifier 206, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]), the control unit comprising:
processing circuitry; a network interface coupled to the processing circuitry (read as baseband processor 202 and controller circuit 216, and antenna 214, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]); and
a memory coupled to the processing circuitry, wherein the memory comprises machine readable computer program instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry (read as memory 218, figure 2, par [0032]), causes the network node to perform a method comprising:
obtaining a transmit signal quality requirement for an upcoming radio transmission (read as control circuit 216 is configured to measure parameters of the signal S.sub.OUT output from the power amplifier 206 and to evaluate a measured signal, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]);
determining a maximum amount of distortion allowed to be contributed by the PA and by the DAC while meeting the transmit signal quality requirement (read as the quality of the output signal may be measured indirectly, by evaluating the AM/AM and AM/PM distortion introduced by the power amplifier (which is the output circuit of transmission chain 204 having power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) to meet the value of predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH which having an corresponding distortion amount value as a max limit, and the inputs of power amplifier 206 are based on the outputs of controllable DAC 212 within the transmission chain 204, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]); and
jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DAC to generate an amount of distortion below the maximum amount of distortion, while improving a secondary objective of the radio transmitter (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1) in view of KIM (US 20160212640 A1).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses the claimed invention above and obtaining a transmit signal quality requirement comprising an adjacent channel leakage ratio (ACLR) (par [0036]) but does not specifically disclose quality requirement comprising an error vector magnitude (EVM) requirement.
Nonetheless, Kim discloses the quality index may be related to at least one signal quality characteristic among spectrum, power, peak level in time domain, adjacent channel leakage ratio (ACLR), error vector magnitude (EVM), occupied bandwidth (OBW), spectrum emission mask (SEM), noise figure (NF), complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF), signal to noise ratio (SNR), and spurious characteristic, par [0010].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of KIM into the teachings of Pinarello to design the system to use EVM as the signal quality instead of ACLR as it is just a matter of design choice.
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1) in view of Friedrich et al. (US 20120219088 A1).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses the claimed invention above and different modulation types (par [0026]-[0027]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the transmit signal quality requirement is determined in dependence of a modulation format of the upcoming radio transmission.
However, Friedrich discloses transmit signal quality in dependence on the type of modulation, par [0016], [0079] and [0081].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Friedrich into the teachings of Pinarello to design the system to have the transmit signal quality requirement determined in dependence of a modulation format as the right modulation format is critical for optimizing signal quality.
Claim 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1) in view of LOZHKIN (US 20130049877A1).
Consider claim 8, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the hardware configuration of the DAC comprises a resolution and/or a sampling rate, and the resolution of the DAC comprises any of number of quantization bits, least significant bit configuration, and most significant bit configuration.
Nonetheless, LOZHKIN discloses DAC having number of quantization level (bit resolution), par [0056]-[0058].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of LOZHKIN into the teachings of Pinarello to design the DAC to have number of quantization level (bit resolution) in order to generate a desired number of discrete output levels.
Claim 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1) in view of Matsumoto (US 20130082775 A1).
Consider claim 22, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses comprising jointly adapting a hardware configuration of circuit elements comprised in the radio transmitter to generate an amount of distortion below the maximum amount of distortion, while improving the secondary objective of the radio transmitter (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts the operating point of one or more elements (i.e. power amplifier 206 and DAC 212) in the transmission chain 204 based upon the comparison of the measured signal quality of the output signal S.sub.OUT and the value of the predetermined threshold value S.sub.TH with corresponding distortion amount value, figure 2, par [0031]-[0036]; also see par [0026] and [0019] for improving signal quality and other improvements) but does not specifically disclose an oscillator comprised in the radio transmitter to generate distortion.
Nonetheless, Matsumoto comprising oscillator 208 within the transmitting RF unit 200 configured to assist in sampling distortion at any point of the spectrum in order to assist the detector module 232 to detect distortion that may be reduced or eliminated and for assisting signal quality control, par [0035], [0072]-[0073] and [0080].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsumoto into the teachings of Pinarello to design the system to include an oscillator within the transmission chain to assist in distortion reduction and signal quality control/improvement.
Claim 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinarello et al. (US 20120071120 A1) in view of Liu (US 20140292403 A1).
Consider claim 26, as applied to claim 1 above, Pinarello discloses wherein jointly adapting the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DAC (read as the control circuit 216 dynamically adjusts both the PA 206 active area and the DAC 212 operating point/gain (par [0033]-[0034]) based on the secondary objective of the radio transmitter (read as incrementally adjusts operating points subject to the signal quality threshold (par [0035]) while targeting reduced/optimized current or power consumption (par [0028] and [0076]-[0077]), and iterative feedback adjustment and reaching an optimized operation point (par [0028], [0035] and [0076]-[0077]) but does not specifically disclose comprises: selecting an optimal joint configuration from a set of possible joint configuration of the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DAC based on the secondary objective of the radio transmitter; and adapting the hardware configuration of the PA and the hardware configuration of the DAC based on the optimal joint configuration.
Nonetheless, Liu discloses a power amplifier signal compensation on distortion, comprising evaluates various candidate configuration values (a plurality/set), recording performance results, and designating the candidate that yields an optimal performance metric (ACLR) as the optimal setting, which corresponding to selecting an optimal configuration from a set of possible configurations based on an objective metric, see par [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsumoto into the teachings of Pinarello to modify Pinarello’s jointly controlled PA and DAC operating point adaptation to use Liu’s explicit candidate-set evaluation and “designate as optimal” selection technique as the mechanism for choosing operating settings, in order to implement a structured, measurement driven selection of the configuration corresponding to optimized performance, while maintaining the objective of reducing or optimizing current consumption subject to acceptable signal quality.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645