DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-11, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 22 and 39 under 103 (a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Erdos et al (herein Erdos) US PG PUB 2010/0142966.
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) 22, 23, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rojas Calvente et al (herein Rojas) US PG PUB 2024/0171272 and Erdos et al (herein Erdos) US PG PUB 2010/0142966.
Re claim 22, Rojas discloses a method of controlling optical wireless communication, the method comprising:
a first wireless communication device as a receiver, the first wireless communication device receiving an optical reference signal from an LED of a second wireless communication device (Fig. 1 depicts a simplified version of a free-space optical point to point communication, which is composed of two transceivers TRX1 and TRX2 ¶ [0049]);
based on the optical reference signal as received by the receiver of the first wireless communication device, the first wireless communication device estimating a first channel gain of an optical channel from the LED of the second wireless communication device to the LED of the first wireless communication device (wherein the optical receiver 210 comprises a photodiode (PD) 211 and a transimpedance amplifier (TIA) 212. Sometimes a photodiode 211 is also called as a photo detector, a light detector, or a photo sensor. A photodiode may contain optical filters and built-in lenses. Depending on the construction of the device, photodiodes can be classified into different types, such as PN photodiode, Schottky photodiode, PIN photodiode, and Avalanche photodiode. The TIA 212 is configured to amplify an electrical output of the photodiode or photo detector 211. In this example, the controller 204 is further configured to apply the gain setting adjustment to the TIA 212. Thus, the gain of the receiver chain is adjusted accordingly ¶ [0056]);
based on the estimated first channel gain, the first wireless communication device estimating a second channel gain of an optical channel from the LED of the first wireless communication device to the LED of the second wireless communication device; and
based on the estimated second channel gain, the first wireless communication device controlling transmission of outgoing optical wireless communication signals from the first wireless communication device to a receiver of the second wireless communication device (Thus, the local communication device is an optical transceiver supporting bi-directional optical communication, which comprises both the apparatus and the optical transmitter in a same housing. Such a gain adjustment mechanism assumes that the bi-directional optical link is symmetrical, and the two remote devices may use a same or similar output power level. In practice, this is a very common scenario, especially for point-to-point optical wireless communication. Therefore, upon a gain setting adjustment derived based on a first signal received from a remote device by the apparatus, the controller may apply the gain adjustment to the co-located transmitter for sending a second signal to the remote device ¶ [0021], wherein the second channel gain is set based on the received first channel gain).
Rojas does not explicitly disclose using a light emitting diode (LED) of a first wireless communication device as a receiver, the first wireless communication device receiving an optical reference signal from an LED of a second wireless communication device. However, Erdos that there is on the ground side a photodiode receiver, Fig. 2, wherein it is discloses a ground to terminal aircraft communication system 100 may include a ground side optical transceiver, which may comprise a laser transmitter and an LED receiver ¶ [0019], such that the photodiode could also be a LED receiver.
Rojas and Erdos are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, wireless optical communication. At the time filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Rojas and Erdos before him or her, to modify the photodiode of Rojas to include the LED receiver of Erdos because it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, in this case, receiver and process an optical signal.
Re claim 23, Rojas and Erdos disclose all the elements of claim 22, which claim 23 is dependent. Furthermore, Rojas discloses wherein the estimating the first channel gain is further based on a characteristic of the LED of the further second wireless communication device (The point-to-point optical wireless communication system 100 comprises two identical communication devices, a first optical transceiver device 150 and a second optical transceiver device 160. Both devices 150, 160 comprise the apparatus 200 according to the present invention and an optical transmitter 151, 161 connected thereto. Symmetrical bi-directional link is assumed in this example. As disclosed above, in this setup, the gain setting adjustment derived by the apparatus may be applied to the receiver chain, to the transmitter chain, or to both, ¶ [0061]such that the signal sent from the second apparatus, which is the first channel, to be based on the received signal from the signal from the first apparatus, which is received by the LED of the first apparatus).
Re claim 39, Rojas discloses a wireless communication device comprising:
at least one processing circuit (the apparatus 200 comprises at least an optical receiver 210, a power detector 202, a digital baseband module 203, and a controller 204. The controller 204 may be a low power processor or controller, such as a microcontroller (MCU).); and
a memory comprising program code executable by the at least one processing circuit (The terms “program” or “computer program” are used herein in a generic sense to refer to any type of computer code (e.g., software or microcode) that can be employed to program one or more processors or controllers ¶ [0071]), whereby execution of the program code by the at least one processing circuit causes (Executable code for a method according to the invention may be stored on computer/machine readable storage means. Examples of computer/machine readable storage means include non-volatile memory devices, optical storage medium/devices, solid-state media, integrated circuits, servers, etc. Preferably, the computer program product comprises non-transitory program code means stored on a computer readable medium for performing a method according to the invention when said program product is executed on a computer ¶ [0069]) the wireless communication device to:
based on the optical reference signal as received by the LED of the wireless communication device, estimate a first channel gain of an optical channel from the LED of the further wireless communication device to the LED of the wireless communication device (Fig. 1 depicts a simplified version of a free-space optical point to point communication, which is composed of two transceivers TRX1 and TRX2 ¶ [0049]);
based on the estimated first channel gain, estimate a second channel gain of an optical channel from the LED of the wireless communication device to the LED of the further wireless communication device; and
based on the estimated second channel gain, control transmission of outgoing optical wireless communication signals from the wireless communication device to the further wireless communication device (Thus, the local communication device is an optical transceiver supporting bi-directional optical communication, which comprises both the apparatus and the optical transmitter in a same housing. Such a gain adjustment mechanism assumes that the bi-directional optical link is symmetrical, and the two remote devices may use a same or similar output power level. In practice, this is a very common scenario, especially for point-to-point optical wireless communication. Therefore, upon a gain setting adjustment derived based on a first signal received from a remote device by the apparatus, the controller may apply the gain adjustment to the co-located transmitter for sending a second signal to the remote device ¶ [0021], wherein the second channel gain is set based on the received first channel gain).
Rojas does not explicitly disclose using a light emitting diode (LED) of the wireless communication device as a receiver, receive an optical reference signal from an LED of a further wireless communication device. However, Erdos that there is on the ground side a photodiode receiver, Fig. 2, wherein it is discloses a ground to terminal aircraft communication system 100 may include a ground side optical transceiver, which may comprise a laser transmitter and an LED receiver ¶ [0019], such that the photodiode could also be a LED receiver.
Rojas and Erdos are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, wireless optical communication. At the time filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Rojas and Erdos before him or her, to modify the photodiode of Rojas to include the LED receiver of Erdos because it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, in this case, receiver and process an optical signal.
Claim(s) 35 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rojas and Erdos as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Lee et al (herein Lee) US PG PUB 2009/0110405.
Re claim 35 and 38, Rojas and Erdos disclose all the elements of claim 22, which claim 35 and 38 are dependent. Furthermore, Rojas does not explicitly disclose wherein the first wireless or the second wireless communication device is a mobile station.
However, Lee discloses to wireless communication between mobile terminals and, more particularly, to a method of performing optical communication using visible light and a mobile terminal for performing the same. ¶ [0003].
Rojas and Lee are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, wireless optical communication. At the time filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Rojas and Lee before him or her, to modify the two transceivers of Rojas to include the elements to be within mobile terminals of Lee because it combines prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield predictable results, in this case, enabling the terminals to be mobile and used where needed.
Claim(s) 36 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rojas and Erdos as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Polaganga et al (herein Polaganga) US PG PUB 2023/0319660.
Re claim 36 and 37, Rojas and Erdos discloses all the elements of claim 22, which claim 36 and 37 are dependent. Additionally, while Rojas and Erdos disclose the operation of wireless communication elements, the system does not explicitly disclose wherein the second wireless communication device of the first wireless communication device is an access node of a wireless communication network.
However, Polaganga discloses UE 101 and wireless access nodes 111-112 wirelessly communicates over radio channels or some other wireless communication media. Wireless access nodes 111-112 and network controller 113 communicate over network connections that comprise metallic wiring, glass fibers, radio channels, or some other communication media. Wireless UE 101 and wireless access nodes 111-112 comprise radios. UE 101, nodes 111-112, and controller 113 comprise microprocessors, software, memories, transceivers, bus circuitry, and the like. The microprocessors comprise Digital Signal Processors (DSP), Central Processing Units (CPU), Graphical Processing Units (GPU), Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), and/or the like. The memories comprise Random Access Memory (RAM), flash circuitry, disk drives, and/or the like. The memories store software like operating systems, user applications, relay applications, network applications, radio applications, and network functions. The microprocessors retrieve the software from the memories and execute the software to drive the operation of wireless communication network 100 ¶ [0022].
Rojas, Erdos, and Polaganga are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, free or wireless communication elements. At the time filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Snyder, Rojas, and Polaganga before him or her, to modify the transceiver elements of Snyder and Rojas to include the ability to have a processor to carry out operating systems, user applications, relay applications, network applications, and network functions and operate as an access node to communicate overall to a network of Polaganga because it combines prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield predictable results, in this case, enabling the transceiver elements to access communications through devices through a larger network.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 24-34 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:
Re claims 24 and 25, these claims were previously indicated allowable and the reasons stated in the previous office action still apply
Re claim 26, the claim recites “The method according to claim 22, further comprising:
based on the first channel gain, the first wireless communication device estimating a third channel gain of an optical channel from the LED of the first wireless communication device to a photodetector of the second wireless communication device; and
based on the estimated third channel gain, the first wireless communication device controlling transmission of outgoing optical wireless communication signals from the first wireless communication device to the photodetector of the second wireless communication device.”
The system discloses the use of a LED alongside the photodetector. While the prior art of Rojas discloses the photodetector, the modification of Rojas to have the receiver to be an LED is disclosed by the prior art of Erdos. However, this would remove the photodetector such that both are not present. The prior art of Puerta (US PG PUB 2024/0297713) such that the transmitter LED could be used as a receiver, such that if this prior art was used to modify the prior of Rojas, the LED and the photodetector could both be present. However, the additional limitation of estimated a third channel gain based on the optical channel wherein “based on the estimated third channel gain, the first wireless communication device controlling transmission of outgoing optical wireless communication signals from the first wireless communication device to the photodetector of the second wireless communication device”. The prior art, alone or in combination does not disclosed the modification of estimating multiple channel gains, some from the LED acting as a receiver, and apply it to the optical signal from the LED, to be received by the photodetector, such that when the claim scope is considered as a whole, the claim is considered allowable.
Re claim 27, 29, 30, 33, and 34, these claims are dependent upon claim 26 and are allowable for the reasons previously stated.
Re claim 28, the claim was previously indicated allowable and the reasons stated in the previous office action still apply
Re claim 31 and 32, these claims are dependent upon claim 28 and are allowable for the reasons previously stated.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANYA MOTSINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7488. The examiner can normally be reached 9-4.
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, David Payne can be reached at (571)272-3024. 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.
TANYA MOTSINGER
Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/TANYA T MOTSINGER/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights