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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
At pages 11-14, the Applicant argues with respect to independent claims 1 and 30, stating the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest that “said response originates, or is otherwise generated by, a respective WTRU available within the network,” as well as the prior art fails to teach or suggest, “[receiving], from one or more RF energy transfer (ET) UEs, one or more responses to the request”.
In response, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner finds the Applicant’s arguments unpersuasive because they improperly import limitations into the claims that do not actually appear to be recited. The claims merely recite transmitting, “to a set of radio frequency (RF) energy transfer (ET) UEs, a request for initiating an RF energy-harvesting operation,” and receiving “from one or more RF ET UEs in the set, one or more responses to the request.” The claims do not require that the responses originate from another “energy harvesting device,” nor do the claims require that the responding devices themselves be operating as energy harvesting devices. Rather, the claims expressly identify the responding entities as “RF ET UEs,” i.e., UEs capable of transferring RF energy to the claimed “EH-capable UE.” Thus, the Applicant’s argument appears to conflate the claimed “EH-capable UE” with the separately recited “RF ET UEs.” No claim language requires the responses themselves to be generated by another energy harvesting UE, or requires any particular internal mechanism by which the responses are generated.
Furthermore, Balasubramanian teaches, or at least suggests, the disputed limitations. The rejection maps the claimed “EH-capable UE” to the EH WTRU, and further maps the claimed “RF ET UEs” to the discloses legacy WTRUs operating with assistance from the gNB to provide RF energy transfer functionality. Balasubramanian expressly discloses that legacy WTRUs may participate in wireless energy transfer operations with network assistance, thereby teaching devices capable of transferring RF energy to the EH WTRU. Accordingly, communications transmitted between the EH WTRU and such legacy WTRU/gNB-assisted devices reasonably correspond to the claimed request and response signaling associated with initiating RF energy harvesting operations.
Furthermore, the Applicant’s argument that Balasubramanian allegedly fails to disclose responses “originating” from the respective energy harvesting devices is therefore not commensurate with the scope of the claims. The claims merely require receiving one or more responses from one or more RF energy transfer UEs in the set. Balasubramanian disclosed WTRUs participating in network-assisted RF energy transfer operations necessarily communicate signaling associated with such operations, including responsive communications exchanged with the EH WTRU. Nothing in the claims requires any additional, specialized response-generation mechanism beyond such communications.
Additionally, the amendment from a singular RF energy transfer UE to “a set of RF ET UEs” does not patentably distinguish the claims over Balasubramanian. The claims are directed towards an apparatus at the energy harvesting capable UE, not to an entire system comprising multiple RF ET UEs. The recited “set” merely identifies potential communication counterparts of the claimed apparatus rather than positively reciting additional structure of the claimed apparatus itself. Moreover, Balasubramanian’s disclosure of wireless communications among multiple WTRUs within the network environment, including the architecture illustrated in Fig. 1A, reasonably teaches and suggests communication capability with multiple RF ET UEs, since wireless communication systems conventionally support communication with one or more peer devices. Similar rationale holds true with respect to the Applicant’s arguments presented at pages 17-18 with respect to claim 24.
At pages 14-17, the Applicant argues with respect to independent claim 15.
In response, the Applicant’s arguments are not considered persuasive because the examiner believes they apply a narrow interpretation to the recited “select” and “indicate” limitations. The claims do not require any particular selection algorithm, dedicated selection message, or specialized indication format. Rather, the claims broadly recite that the base station selects at least one RF ET UE from one or more RF ET UEs to transfer RF energy to the EH-capable UE and indicates for the selected RF ET UE to transmit RF energy.
Prior art Balasubramanian teaches network-assisted wireless energy transfer involving an EH WTRU, legacy WTRUs, and a gNB/base station coordinating wireless energy transfer operations. Such coordination (as similarly addressed above and taught throughout Balasubramanian) reasonably teaches and suggests the claimed limitations. Further, the disclosure of gNB-assisted operation likewise teaches or at least suggests the claimed “indicate” limitation. In order for a selected legacy WTRU to participate in RF energy transfer to the EH WTRU under network-assisted coordination, the gNB communicates control signaling, scheduling, configuration information, authorization, resource allocation, operational instructions, etc. causing the selected WTRU to perform the RF energy transmission operation. Such signaling corresponds to the claimed “indication” for the selected RF ET UE to transmit the RF energy to the EH-capable UE.
For these reasons, inter alia, the examiner believes the previous rejection of record should remain upheld. An updated action is provided below to recite the latest claim amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7, 9-11, 13-16, 18, 20-25, 27-28, and 30-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0248432) in view of Xu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0078779).
Regarding Claim 1:
Balasubramanian et al. discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at an energy-harvesting capable (EH-capable) user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1B, EH WTRU 102 with transceiver 120, processor 118, memory 130, 132, and their related discussion), comprising: memory (Fig. 1B, memory 130, 132, and their related discussion); and at least one processor coupled to the memory (Fig. 1B, processor 118 coupled to memory 130, 132, and their related discussion) and configured to: transmit, to a set of radio frequency (RF) energy transfer (ET) UEs, a message for initiating an RF energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See response to arguments provided above, as well as fig. 1A and its related discussion); receive, from the one or more RF ET UEs in the set of RF ET UEs, one or more responses to the request (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the EH WTRU receives various configuration parameters for subsequent use in determining the best receive direction to use for energy harvesting. “At 1803, the EH WTRU receives from the gNB the various configuration parameters for beam training and energy harvesting, which may include timing parameters for beam training and the aforementioned SRS super-Set(s) schedules, the uplink transmit directions of the legacy WTRU(s) and the location(s) of the legacy WTRU(s).” See response to arguments provided above, as well as fig. 1A and its related discussion); and receive RF energy transmitted by at least one RF ET UE selected from the one or more RF ET UEs based on criteria related to one or more of an RF ET UE characteristic, an RF ET UE connection quality characteristic, or a mobility characteristic (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose receiving RF energy transmitted from one of a selected legacy WTRU, based upon the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.). While Balasubramanian discloses the transmission of a message from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU to subsequently initiate an energy harvesting operation, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach said message is a request for initiating the RF energy harvesting operation.
However, Xu et al. discloses transmit a request for initiating a radio frequency (RF) energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 2 and 11-12, electronic device 200 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claim 7, etc. which disclose the electronic device making a request for initiating an energy harvesting mode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Balasubramanian to explicitly request an initiation of an energy harvesting operation, as taught within Xu, to provide a direct request thereby improving clarity, efficiency, reliability, and reducing latency of the system by clearly specifying the intent and needs of the user equipment.
Regarding Claim 2:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: select, at the EH-capable UE, the at least one RF ET UE based on the criteria (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose selecting a legacy WTRU, based upon the received signals including, for example, transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.).
Regarding Claim 4:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein: the criteria relate to the RF ET UE characteristic (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose selecting a legacy WTRU, based upon the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.); the request comprises a first indication of support by the EH-capable UE for, or that the request is related to, one or more of: separated-receiver-based EH, time-switching-based EH, power-splitting-based EH, a duration of an EH session, or a set of one or more waveforms for ET (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0180, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See also paragraph 0160 which discloses the respective signal being associated with one or more parameters associated with the devices energy harvesting capabilities. See also Xu: paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claims 7-8, etc.); and the one or more responses comprise a second indication of the RF ET UEs characteristic related to support for one or more of: the separated-receiver-based EH indicated in the request, the time-switching-based EH indicated in the request, the power-splitting-based EH indicated in the request, the duration of the EH session indicated in the request, or at least one waveform in the set of one or more waveforms indicated in the request (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0032, 0109, 0119, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the respective wireless network(s) existing between the EH WTRUs, base stations, legacy WTRUs, etc. as well as the respective indications and various signals to be received by the EH WTRU in order to establish a time frame and legacy WTRU from which to receive RF energy from. Again, the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components).
Regarding Claim 7:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relate to the RF ET UE connection quality characteristic and is based on at least one of: a channel power threshold for ET, an established connection with the EH-capable UE, or a type of communication between the at least one RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0068, 0113, 0122, 0137, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose various criteria related to the type of communication between the devices, the channel quality, etc.).
Regarding Claim 9:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 7. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one RF ET UE comprises only RF ET UEs in communication with the EH-capable UE at a time of the request (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss the legacy WTRU(s)).
Regarding Claim 10:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relates to the type of communication between the RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE and is based on a data traffic density threshold of the communication between the RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0063, 0068, 0092, 0113, 0122, 0137, 0141, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss the respective types of communication, as well as respective traffic conditions, including dense scenarios).
Regarding Claim 11:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one RF ET UE is further selected based on a threshold distance between the EH-capable UE and the at least one RF ET UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0128, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose selecting a legacy WTRU, based upon the received signals including, for example, locations of the legacy WTRUs, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.), and wherein a distance between the EH-capable UE and an RF ET UE is determined based on one or more of: measurement of a reference signal from the RF ET UE, or at least one zone ID indicated in sidelink control information (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0128, 0156-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss the various ways with which a distance between components may be determined, including, channel measurement, as well as geographical areas, e.g., zones, each identified by a unique geographical ID, as discussed within paragraphs 0100-0102, etc.).
Regarding Claim 13:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 2. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein to select the at least one RF ET UE, the at least one processor is configured to: determine that a set of zone IDs associated with a set of RF ET UEs including the at least one RF ET UE indicates that the set of RF ET UEs is within a first threshold distance; and determine that the at least one RF ET UE is within a second smaller threshold distance via a second distance determination procedure (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0100-0103, 0122, 0128, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss utilizing geographical zones along with locations and positionings of the legacy WTRUs.).
Regarding Claim 14:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relate to the mobility characteristic and is based on at least one of: a first mobility state of the at least one RF ET UE, a second mobility state of the EH-capable UE, or a relative mobility state of the at least one RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030, 0040, 0053-0056, 0075-0079, 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss the respective mobility, mobility requirements, mobile location-based services, etc. subsequently utilized in order to determine or hand-off a respective legacy WTRU).
Regarding Claim 15:
Balasubramanian et al. discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a base station (Fig. 1A, base station(s) 114a, 114b, and their related discussion), comprising: memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory (Fig. 1A, base station(s) 114a, 114b, and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0191, 0216, etc. which disclose a processor in association with software incorporated in a computer readable medium for execution is used to implement a radio frequency transceiver for use in a base station) and configured to: receive a message to initiate a radio frequency (RF) energy-harvesting (EH) operation for an EH-capable user equipment (UE) (Figs. 1A-1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 communicating with the respective transceiver of base station(s) 114a, 114b, and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0158-0175, 0176-0191, 0216, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a base station in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU.), wherein the request comprises an indication of support by the EH-capable UE for, or that the request is related to, one or more of separated-receiver-based EH, time-switching-based EH, power-splitting-based EH, a duration of an EH session, or a set of one or more waveforms for ET (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0180, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See also paragraph 0160 which discloses the respective signal being associated with one or more parameters associated with the devices energy harvesting capabilities); select, from one or more RF energy transfer (ET) UEs, at least one RF ET UE to transfer RF energy to the EH-capable UE based on criteria related to one or more of an RF ET UE characteristic, an RF ET UE connection quality characteristic, or a mobility characteristic (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose receiving RF energy transmitted from one of a selected legacy WTRU, based upon the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.); and indicate for the selected at least one RF ET UE to transmit the RF energy to the EH-capable UE (Figs. 1A-1B, 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0191, etc. which disclose selecting a base station, based upon the received signals including, for example, transmit directions and locations of the base stations, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters). While Balasubramanian discloses the reception of a message from the EH WTRU to subsequently initiate an energy harvesting operation, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach said message is a request for initiating the RF energy harvesting operation.
However, Xu et al. discloses a message is a request for initiating a radio frequency (RF) energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 2 and 11-12, electronic device 200 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claim 7, etc. which disclose the electronic device making a request for initiating an energy harvesting mode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Balasubramanian to explicitly request an initiation of an energy harvesting operation, as taught within Xu, to provide a direct request thereby improving clarity, efficiency, reliability, and reducing latency of the system by clearly specifying the intent and needs of the user equipment.
Regarding Claim 16:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relate to the RF ET UE characteristic (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose receiving RF energy transmitted from one of a selected legacy WTRU, based upon the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.) and the at least one processor is further configured to: receive, from the one or more RF ET UEs, one or more responses comprising an additional indication of at least one RF ET UE characteristic related to support for one or more of: the separated-receiver-based EH indicated in the request, the time-switching-based EH indicated in the request, the power-splitting-based EH indicated in the request, the duration of the EH session indicated in the request, or at least one waveform in the set of one or more waveforms indicated in the request (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0032, 0109, 0119, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the respective wireless network(s) existing between the EH WTRUs, base stations, legacy WTRUs, etc. as well as the respective indications and various signals to be received by the EH WTRU in order to establish a time frame and legacy WTRU from which to receive RF energy from. Again, the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components).
Regarding Claim 18:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relate to the RF ET UE connection quality characteristic and is based on at least one of: a channel power threshold for ET, an established connection with the EH-capable UE, or a type of communication between the at least one RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0068, 0113, 0122, 0137, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0191, etc. which disclose various criteria related to the type of communication between the devices, the channel quality, etc.).
Regarding Claim 20:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relate to the type of communication between the RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE and is based on a data traffic density threshold of the communication between the RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0063, 0068, 0092, 0113, 0122, 0128, 0137, 0141, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0191, etc. which discuss the respective types of communication, as well as respective traffic conditions, including dense scenarios).
Regarding Claim 21:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one RF ET UE is further selected based on a threshold distance between the EH-capable UE and the at least one RF ET UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0063, 0068, 0092, 0113, 0122, 0128, 0137, 0141, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0191, etc. which disclose selecting a base station, based upon the received signals including, for example, locations of the base stations, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.), and wherein a distance between the EH-capable UE and an RF ET UE is determined based on one or more of: a positioning procedure, measurement of a reference signal from the RF ET UE, known positions of the EH-capable UE and the RF ET UE, at least one zone ID indicated in sidelink control information, or a location management function (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0063, 0068, 0092, 0113, 0122, 0128, 0137, 0141, 0148, 0155-0175, 0176-0191, etc. which discuss utilizing locations and respective positionings of the base stations, as well as the various ways with which a distance between components may be determined, including, channel measurement, as well as geographical areas, e.g., zones, each identified by a unique geographical ID, as discussed within paragraphs 0100-0102, etc.).
Regarding Claim 22:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein to select the at least one RF ET UE, the at least one processor is configured to: determine that a set of zone IDs associated with a set of RF ET UEs including the at least one RF ET UE indicates that the set of RF ET UEs is within a first threshold distance; and determine that the at least one RF ET UE is within a second smaller threshold distance via a second distance determination procedure (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0100-0103, 0122, 0128, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss utilizing geographical zones along with locations and positionings of the legacy WTRUs.).
Regarding Claim 23:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the criteria relates to the mobility characteristic and is based on at least one of: a first mobility state of the at least one RF ET UE, a second mobility state of the EH-capable UE, or a relative mobility state of the at least one RF ET UE and the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030, 0040, 0053-0056, 0075-0079, 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which discuss the respective mobility, mobility requirements, mobile location-based services, etc. subsequently utilized in order to determine or hand-off a respective base station).
Regarding Claim 24:
Balasubramanian et al. discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a radio frequency (RF) energy-transfer (ET) user equipment (UE) (Figs. 1A-1D, EH WTRU 102 with transceiver 120, base stations 114a, 114b, legacy WTRUs, etc., and their related discussion), comprising: memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory (Figs. 1A-1D, legacy WTRUs, and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0030-0042, 0191, 0216, etc. which disclose a processor in association with software incorporated in a computer readable medium for execution is used to implement a radio frequency transceiver for use in a WTRU, UE, terminal, base station, etc.) and configured to: receive, from an energy harvesting capable (EH-capable) UE, a message to initiate an RF EH operation for the EH-capable UE (Figs. 1B, 17-18, legacy WTRU, base stations 114a, 114b, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added.); and transmit, to the EH-capable UE, a response indicating a support for the RF EH operation based on an RF ET UE characteristic (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the EH WTRU receives various configuration parameters for subsequent use in determining the best receive direction to use for energy harvesting. “At 1803, the EH WTRU receives from the gNB the various configuration parameters for beam training and energy harvesting, which may include timing parameters for beam training and the aforementioned SRS super-Set(s) schedules, the uplink transmit directions of the legacy WTRU(s) and the location(s) of the legacy WTRU(s).”). While Balasubramanian discloses the transmission of a message from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU to subsequently initiate an energy harvesting operation, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach said message is a request for initiating the RF energy harvesting operation.
However, Xu et al. discloses the message transmitted is a request for initiating a radio frequency (RF) energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 2 and 11-12, electronic device 200 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claim 7, etc. which disclose the electronic device making a request for initiating an energy harvesting mode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Balasubramanian to explicitly request an initiation of an energy harvesting operation, as taught within Xu, to provide a direct request thereby improving clarity, efficiency, reliability, and reducing latency of the system by clearly specifying the intent and needs of the user equipment.
Regarding Claim 25:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 24. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit RF energy to the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose selecting a legacy WTRU, based upon the received signals including, for example, transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.).
Regarding Claim 27:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 25. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive an indication from the EH-capable UE to transmit the RF energy to the EH-capable UE (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0032, 0109, 0119, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the respective communications/indications to be transmitted and subsequently received in order to commence the energy harvesting operations).
Regarding Claim 28:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 24. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein: the request comprises an indication of support by the EH-capable UE for, or that the request is related to, one or more of: separated-receiver-based EH, time-switching-based EH, power-splitting-based EH, a duration of an EH session, or a set of one or more waveforms for ET (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0180, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See also paragraph 0160 which discloses the respective signal being associated with one or more parameters associated with the devices energy harvesting capabilities. See also Xu: paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claims 7-8, etc.); and the response comprises an indication of at least one RF ET node characteristic related to support for one or more of: the separated-receiver-based EH indicated in the request, the time-switching-based EH indicated in the request, the power-splitting-based EH indicated in the request, the duration of the EH session indicated in the request, or at least one waveform in the set of one or more waveforms indicated in the request (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0030-0032, 0109, 0119, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the respective wireless network(s) existing between the EH WTRUs, base stations, legacy WTRUs, etc. as well as the respective indications and various signals to be received by the EH WTRU in order to establish a time frame and legacy WTRU from which to receive RF energy from. Again, the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components).
Regarding Claim 30:
Balasubramanian et al. discloses a method for wireless communication for an energy-harvesting (EH) capable user equipment (UE) (Fig. 1B, EH WTRU 102 with transceiver 120, processor 118, memory 130, 132, and their related discussion), comprising: transmitting, to a set of radio frequency (RF) energy transfer (ET) UEs, a message for initiating an RF energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See response to arguments provided above, as well as fig. 1A and its related discussion); receiving, from the one or more RF ET UEs in the set of RF ET UEs, one or more responses to the request (Figs. 17-18, step 1803 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose the EH WTRU receives various configuration parameters for subsequent use in determining the best receive direction to use for energy harvesting. “At 1803, the EH WTRU receives from the gNB the various configuration parameters for beam training and energy harvesting, which may include timing parameters for beam training and the aforementioned SRS super-Set(s) schedules, the uplink transmit directions of the legacy WTRU(s) and the location(s) of the legacy WTRU(s).” See response to arguments provided above, as well as fig. 1A and its related discussion); and receiving RF energy transmitted by at least one RF ET UE selected from the one or more RF ET UEs based on criteria related to one or more of an RF ET UE characteristic, an RF ET UE connection quality characteristic, or a mobility characteristic (Figs. 17-18, steps 1805, 1807, 1809, etc., and their related discussion; see, at least, Abstract, paragraphs 0122, 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose receiving RF energy transmitted from one of a selected legacy WTRU, based upon the received information signals including, for example, information such as “the duration of energy harvesting and/or the periodicity of transmission within a specific period,” as discussed within paragraph 0177, e.g., an RF ET node characteristic, as well as said selection being based on a variety of other potential factors including transmit directions and locations of the legacy WTRUs which would directly correlate to the quality of a potential connection between the components, and at step 1809, commencing energy harvesting based on the selection/parameters.). While Balasubramanian discloses the transmission of a message from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU to subsequently initiate an energy harvesting operation, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach said message is a request for initiating the RF energy harvesting operation.
However, Xu et al. discloses transmitting a request for initiating a radio frequency (RF) energy-harvesting (EH) operation (Figs. 2 and 11-12, electronic device 200 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claim 7, etc. which disclose the electronic device making a request for initiating an energy harvesting mode). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Balasubramanian to explicitly request an initiation of an energy harvesting operation, as taught within Xu, to provide a direct request thereby improving clarity, efficiency, reliability, and reducing latency of the system by clearly specifying the intent and needs of the user equipment.
Regarding Claim 31:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein to transmit the request for initiating the RF EH operation, the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit the request to the one or more RF ET UEs (Figs. 1B, 17-18, EH WTRU 102 transmitting a ZE air interface, and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0158-0175, 0176-0179, etc. which disclose signaling methods from the EH WTRU to a legacy WTRU in order to initiate energy harvesting capabilities of the EH WTRU. “These exemplary signaling methods may be used to initiate or dynamically configure EH-UE energy harvesting capabilities.” Paragraph 0076. “…the EH-WTRU can provide its ZE air interface reception capability/configuration to the gNB over the legacy Uu air interface, and the gNB can then use those configurations to initiate an energy transfer to the EH-WTRU…” Paragraph 0179, emphasis added. See also Xu: Figs. 2 and 11-12, electronic device 200 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0079-0081, 0085, 0192-0193, claim 7, etc. which disclose the electronic device making a request for initiating an energy harvesting mode).
Regarding Claim 32:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian, in further view of Balasubramanian, discloses wherein the EH-capable UE is one of a wearable device, a sensor, or an internet of things (IoT) device (Fig. 1A, plurality of EH WTRUs 102a-102d, and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraph 0030 which disclose user equipment may take the known forms of: an Internet of Things (IoT) device, a watch or other wearable, etc.).
Claim(s) 6, 17, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0248432) in view of Xu et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0078779) and in further view of Elkotby et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2023/0076409).
Regarding Claim 6:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Modified Balasubramanian fails to teach wherein the response to the request from a particular RF ET UE of the one or more RF ET UEs includes an indication that the particular RF ET UE is not available and an additional indication of a time after which an additional request may be transmitted by the EH-capable UE.
However, Elkotby et al. discloses wherein the response to the request from a particular RF ET UE of the one or more RF ET UEs includes an indication that a particular RF ET UE is not available and an additional indication of a time after which an additional request may be transmitted by the EH-capable UE (Fig. 35 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraph 0252 which discloses providing an indication that the node is unable to support the requested service, as well as an indication that the WTRU should enter an idle state of operation before subsequent attempts to re-establish). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Modified Balasubramanian to provide an indication that a particular RF ET UE is not available, as taught within Elkotby, to avoid unnecessary energy expenditure by refraining from multiple energy harvesting attempts thereby improving overall system efficiency, communication protocols, and potentially providing a better user experience.
Regarding Claim 17:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 15. Modified Balasubramanian fails to teach receive a response from an RF ET of the one or more RF ET UEs that includes an additional indication that the RF ET UE is not available for a period of time.
However, Elkotby et al. discloses receive a response from an RF ET UE of the one or more RF ET UEs that includes an additional indication that the RF ET UE is not available for a period of time (Fig. 35 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraph 0252 which discloses providing an indication that the node is unable to support the requested service, as well as an indication that the WTRU should enter an idle state of operation before subsequent attempts to re-establish). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Modified Balasubramanian to provide an indication that a particular RF ET UE is not available, as taught within Elkotby, to avoid unnecessary energy expenditure by refraining from multiple energy harvesting attempts thereby improving overall system efficiency, communication protocols, and potentially providing a better user experience.
Regarding Claim 29:
Modified Balasubramanian teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 24. Modified Balasubramanian fails to teach transmit an indication that the RF ET UE is not available for a period of time.
However, Elkotby et al. discloses transmit an indication that the RF ET UE is not available for a period of time (Fig. 35 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraph 0252 which discloses providing an indication that the node is unable to support the requested service, as well as an indication that the WTRU should enter an idle state of operation before subsequent attempts to re-establish). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Modified Balasubramanian to provide an indication that a particular RF ET UE is not available, as taught within Elkotby, to avoid unnecessary energy expenditure by refraining from multiple energy harvesting attempts thereby improving overall system efficiency, communication protocols, and potentially providing a better user experience.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8, 12, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: dependent claim 5 states, “wherein the request comprises an indication of support by the EH-capable UE for, or that the request is related to, a set of one or more waveforms for ET and the criteria relate to support for at least one waveform in the set of one or more waveforms indicated in the request, and wherein the set of one or more waveforms includes one or more of a deterministic signal, a circularly symmetric complex Gaussian random signal, or an improper complex Gaussian random signal” which appears to be directed towards a non-obvious improvement over the prior art of record. Similarly, dependent claims 8, 12, and 19 each recite subject matter deemed to be directed towards a non-obvious improvement over the prior art of record. It appears as though said limitations, if written into independent form in their entirety, would place the application in condition for allowance, as said limitations appear to be respectively directed towards non-obvious improvements over the prior art of record.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH N INGE whose telephone number is (571)270-7705. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-4:00 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/JOSEPH N INGE/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights