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 office action is in response to the claimed invention filed on April 14, 2023, in which claims 1-8 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on April 14, 2023 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. It has been placed in the application file. The information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 6-8 are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 1 and 6-8 recite the term “whose”. The term “whose” is not acceptable in a claimed language. Only what is referred by “whose” should set forth in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 1 and 6-8 recite the clause “whose parameters”. It is unclear as to “whose parameters” the applicant is referred to.
Claim 2 recites “multiplexes N (N is two or more) pieces of data each having one of M values (M is two or more). It is unclear as what the applicant meant by multiplexes N, wherein N is two or more and M values and wherein M is two or more. It is also unclear as to what the variables N and M are referred to. Clarification and amendment is advised.
Claims 2-5 are also rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claims 1 and 6-8 recite “multiplex signal” is a signal per-se (a transient electric or electromagnetic transmission through a medium, in itself) is not considered patent-eligible subject matter. The multiplex signal describes the steps of a process involving the signal, rather than claiming the signal as a noun itself, the claim can become patent-eligible. This principle was established by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the 2007 case In re Nuijten, and it remains binding precedent. Therefore, claims 1 and 6-8 fails to fall under statutory subject mater under 35 USC 101.
Claims 2-5 are also rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujihara WO 0178280 A1 in view of Nakagiri US 20090168913 A1.
As to claim 1, Fujihara discloses a transmission apparatus, comprising:
a multiplex signal generator to generate a multiplex signal based on multiplexed data into which two or more pieces of data are multiplexed (see page 2, para [2]-[8] and page 3, para. [1]-[9], the amplitude of the digital multiplexed signal generated by the digital modulation means and the amplitude adapted to the signal processing of the quadrature modulation means are provided, wherein a scaling calculating means for calculating a scaling value of the amplitude adjustment processing for the digital multiplexed signal based on the range, and an amplitude for the digital multiplexed signal according to the scaling value calculated by the scaling calculating means); and
a multiplexing processor to generate the multiplexed data by multiplexing the pieces of data using a neural network whose parameters have been adjusted based on constraint conditions defined by an amplitude of the multiplex signal and a phase difference among the two or more pieces of data included in the multiplex signal”
(see page 2, para [2]-[8] and page 3, para. [1]-[9], calculates the scaling value of the processing, applies he amplitude adjustment processing to the digital multiplexed signal according to the calculated scaling value, and inputs the result to the signal conversion means, and at the same time, corrects the control signal according to the calculated scaling value information multiplexing unit multiplexes the calculated phase rotation amount together with pilot data symbols to notify the receiving side what the phase rotation amount calculated by the optimum phase rotation amount calculation unit).
Fujihara does not explicitly disclose the claimed “wherein the neural network has undergone pruning based on updates of parameters and a multiplex signal generated based on the multiplexed data generated using the parameters updated”.
Nakagiri discloses the claimed “wherein the neural network has undergone pruning based on updates of parameters and a multiplex signal generated based on the multiplexed data generated using the parameters updated” (see paragraphs [0004]-[0005], [0019], [0048]-[0054]). [0019] and [0075]-[0090]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Fujihara to use neural network, in order to enable computers to learn and model complex, non-linear relationships in data, leading to breakthroughs in areas like pattern recognition, prediction, and automation, thereby using efficient and low-cost equalizer to obtain high performance in mitigating power amplifier with even severe non-linearity by integrating two techniques together.
As to claim 2, the combination of Fujihara and Nakagiri discloses the invention as claimed. In addition, Fujihara discloses the claimed “wherein the multiplexing processor multiplexes N (N is two or more) pieces of data each having one of M values (M is two or more) using the neural network to generate the multiplexed data represented by MN signal points (see paragraphs [0004]-[0005], [0019], [0048]-[0054]). [0019] and [0075]-[0090]).
As to claim 3, the combination of Fujihara and Nakagiri discloses the invention as claimed. In addition, Fujihara discloses the claimed a parameter monitor to monitor updates of the parameters of the neural network and the multiplex signal generated based on the multiplexed data generated using the updated parameters, and determine which of frequency, phase, or amplitude of the multiplex signal each parameter of the neural network relates to; and a pruning circuit to perform pruning on the neural network based on results of the determination performed by the parameter monitor (see paragraphs [0004]-[0005], [0019], [0048]-[0054]). [0019] and [0075]-[0090]).
As to claim 4, the combination of Fujihara and Nakagiri discloses the invention as claimed. In addition, Fujihara discloses the claimed an evaluation function calculator to calculate an evaluation function for the neural network, based on the constraint conditions and the multiplex signal; and a learning execution circuit to update the parameters of the neural network based on the evaluation function (see paragraphs [0004]-[0005], [0019], [0048]-[0054]). [0019] and [0075]-[0090]).
As to claim 5, the combination of Fujihara and Nakagiri discloses the invention as claimed. In addition, Fujihara discloses the claimed a learning result setting circuit to acquire parameters of a neural network that has been subjected to adjustment of the parameters and pruning by a learning apparatus from the learning apparatus, and update the parameters of the neural network included in the multiplexing processor, in accordance with the acquired parameters (see paragraphs [0004]-[0005], [0019], [0048]-[0054]). [0019] and [0075]-[0090]).
As to claim 6, claim 6 is a transmission method for performing the transmission apparatus of claim 1. It is rejected under the same rationale.
As to claim 7, claim 7 is a control circuit for performing the transmission apparatus of claim 1. It is rejected under the same rationale.
As to claim 8, claim 8 is a storage medium for performing the transmission apparatus of claim 1. It is rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN M CORRIELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-4032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30a-10p(Midflex).
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, Ann J Lo can be reached at (571)272-9767. 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.
/JEAN M CORRIELUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159 December 1, 2025
Prosecution Insights