/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648 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 Amendment
The amendment filed on 06/17/2026 has been entered. Claims 9-18 and 21-29 remain pending in this application. Claim 9 has been amended. Claims 1-8, 19, and 20 have been cancelled. Claims 23-29 are new.
Examiner Comment
Applicant misnumbered new claims 22-29. For examination purposes the Examiner will interpret new claims 22-29 to be claims 23-30, respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/17/2026 regarding prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The combination of Haija and Jian disclose all amendments to the previous claims as evidenced in the prior art rejection below.
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/17/2026 regarding new independent claim 27 and dependent claims 28-30 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
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 of this title, 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 9-13 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija (US 20240429971 A1), hereinafter Haija, in view of Jian (US 20230047993 A1), hereinafter Jian.
Regarding claim 9, Haija, as shown below, discloses a system comprising the following limitations:
transmitting, using one or more antennas (See at least Fig. 2 [0097] “In wireless communications, the RIS 4 can be deployed as 1) a reflector between a transmitter and a receiver”, [0120] “The ED 110 includes a transmitter 201 and a receiver 203 coupled to one or more antennas 204” Haija discloses a transmitter (often depicted as a base station) which transmits a signal to a reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) for reflection.), wireless signals using a first radio access technology (RAT) (See at least [0099] “The radio access network 120 may be a next generation (e.g. sixth generation (6G) or later) radio access network, or a legacy (e.g. 5G, 4G, 3G or 2G) radio access network.”) ;
receiving, using a receiver, a feedback signal from the second electronic device (See at least Fig. 10, Item 1050, [0190] “At step 1050, the UE 1020 feeds back information that identifies one or more reference signal with measurements that meet a threshold (e.g., signal strength is greater or equal a specific value).”); and
transmitting, using the one or more antennas, wireless data to the second electronic device within a selected signal beam from the set of signal beams, wherein the selected signal beam is selected based on the feedback signal and the wireless data is conveyed using radio-frequency signals reflected off a reflector on the reflective device that overlaps the selected signal beam (See at least Figs. 2, 10, Item 1090, [0198] “At step 1090, based on the RIS 1030 being updated with the updated RIS configuration information at step 1085, the base station 1010 and the UE 1020 may exchange data via the RIS 1030.”)
Haija does not explicitly disclose
(See at least [0031] “may be configured to wirelessly communicate with each other in or over a mobile network and/or a wireless access network according to one or more standards and/or specifications […] a radio access technology and/or a cellular technology, such as Fourth Generation (4G) Long Term Evolution (LTE)”)
(See at least Fig. 8B, [0114] “the first node (e.g., wireless access node 104) may independently formulate or use multiple or different beams simultaneously to transmit signals to the different surface element regions SER”);
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously enable independent operation of reflectors (See at least [0114] “Moreover, the intelligent reflecting device 124 may independently set reflection angles of the respective surface element regions to optimally reflect incident signals toward their respective second nodes (e.g., user devices 102) with which they are associated in order to minimize interference between the overall channels”).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Haija and Jian, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 9. Haija further discloses
transmitting the wireless signals comprises: controlling the reflective device to set a reflector on the reflective device to a corresponding orientation (See at least Fig. 10, Items 1085, 1090, [0197] “the new updated RIS configuration information to the RIS 1030 that may be used to update AoD information or the phase difference between two RIS elements at RIS 1030 resulting in a more accurate redirection of the signal towards the UE 1020.” Haija discloses updating configuration of at least two RIS elements (first and second reflectors) such that for additional transmissions the angle of depart (reflection orientation) is different from previous configurations)
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Haija and Jian, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 9 and 10. Haija further discloses
controlling the reflective device to sweep the reflectors on the reflective device over sets of different reflector orientations (See at least Fig. 10, [0197] “At step 1085, the base station 1010, or the network, sends the new updated RIS configuration information to the RIS 1030 that may be used to update AoD information or the phase difference between two RIS elements at RIS 1030 resulting in a more accurate redirection of the signal towards the UE 1020.”); and
sweeping the one or more antennas over the set of signal beams while the reflective device sweeps the reflectors over the sets of different reflector orientations (See at least [0164] “For example, a method may initially involve determining a course estimate of the phase difference via measurements, such as beam sweeping via wide beams between a source, the RIS, and a destination”)
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Haija and Jian, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 9. Haija further discloses
receiving, using the receiver, sensor data from the second electronic device; and updating the selected signal beam based on the sensor data received from the second electronic device (See at least Fig. 10, Item 1050, [0190] “At step 1050, the UE 1020 feeds back information that identifies one or more reference signal with measurements that meet a threshold (e.g., signal strength is greater or equal a specific value).”)
Regarding Claim 13, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 9. Haija further discloses
sweeping the one or more antennas over a subset of the signal beams, the subset of the signal beams surrounding the selected signal beam (See at least [0189] “The UE 1020, while performing beam sweeping, performs measurements of the received reference signals (RS) based on the configuration sent to the UE 1020 by the base station 1010.”);
receiving, using the receiver, an additional feedback signal from the second electronic device after sweeping over the subset of the signal beams; and updating the selected signal beam to one of the signal beams in the subset of signal beams based on the additional feedback signal received from the second electronic device (The Examiner notes that while the above claim element is not explicitly disclosed by Haija and Jian, Haija does disclose the step of transmitting, using the one or more antennas, wireless data to the second electronic device within a selected signal beam from the set of signal beams, wherein the selected signal beam is selected based on the feedback signal and the wireless data is conveyed using radio-frequency signals reflected off a reflector on the reflective device that overlaps the selected signal beam (See at least Fig. 10, Item 1090, [0198] “At step 1090, based on the RIS 1030 being updated with the updated RIS configuration information at step 1085, the base station 1010 and the UE 1020 may exchange data via the RIS 1030.”). Therefore, Haija and Jian differ from the claimed invention because the claimed invention uses an additional feedback signal. However, 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 combination of Haija and Jian so that an additional feedback signal is used with a reasonable expectation of success. It has been held that a mere duplication of parts is an obvious modification, see MPEP 2144.04. In reHarza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). Because no new and unexpected result is produced, the mere duplication of feedback signals has no patentable significance. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve effectiveness by performing operations on multiple signals)
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Haija and Jian, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 9 and 13. Haija further discloses
the first RAT involves a carrier at a frequency greater than or equal to 100 GHz (See at least [0099] “The radio access network 120 may be a next generation (e.g. sixth generation (6G) or later) radio access network, or a legacy (e.g. 5G, 4G, 3G or 2G) radio access network.” The Examiner notes that 6G utilizes THz band (1000 GHz +) as a carrier band)
Haija does not explicitly disclose and the second RAT involves a carrier at a frequency less than or equal to 10 GHz. However, Jian, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
(See at least [0031] “may be configured to wirelessly communicate with each other in or over a mobile network and/or a wireless access network according to one or more standards and/or specifications […] a radio access technology and/or a cellular technology, such as Fourth Generation (4G) Long Term Evolution (LTE)” The Examiner notes that 4G LTE utilizes carrier frequencies of 600 MHz to 2.6 GHz);
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously enable independent operation of reflectors (See at least [0114] “Moreover, the intelligent reflecting device 124 may independently set reflection angles of the respective surface element regions to optimally reflect incident signals toward their respective second nodes (e.g., user devices 102) with which they are associated in order to minimize interference between the overall channels”).
Regarding Claim 25, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 9 and 13. Haija further discloses
transmitting the wireless data comprises transmitting the wireless data using the first RAT (See at least [0100] “the system 100 enables multiple wireless or wired elements to communicate data” See also [0099]);
Claims 14 and 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija, in view of Jian, in further view of Li (US 20250031161 A1), hereinafter Li.
Regarding claim 14, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 9. The combination of Haija and Jian does not explicitly disclose wherein transmitting the wireless signals comprises transmitting a different respective preamble using each of the signal beams in the set of signal beams. However, Li, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
wherein transmitting the wireless signals comprises transmitting a different respective preamble using each of the signal beams in the set of signal beams (See at least [0153] “Each of the RACH occasions/preambles may map to different SSB of the first subset 1002. For example, a first RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB0 is the designated SSB, a second RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB4 is the designated SSB, a third RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB8 is the designated SSB, a fourth RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB12 is the designated SSB”).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the preamble disclosed by Li. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve communication performance (See at least [0057] “The aspects presented herein may enable a UE to provide reporting including multiple SSB indices and associated measurements via group-based SSB subsets, which may facilitate improving communication performance”).
Regarding claim 15, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 14. The combination of Haija and Jian does not explicitly disclose the selected signal beam is selected based on preamble information included in the feedback signal received from the second electronic device. However, Li, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
the selected signal beam is selected based on preamble information included in the feedback signal received from the second electronic device (See at least Fig. 9, [0153] “Each of the RACH occasions/preambles may map to different SSB of the first subset 1002. For example, a first RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB0 is the designated SSB, a second RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB4 is the designated SSB, a third RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB8 is the designated SSB, a fourth RACH occasion or preamble may indicate that the first subset 1002 is the selected SSB subset and that the SSB12 is the designated SSB” Li discloses a “selected” signals in the feedback preamble. See also [0154]-[0160]).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the preamble disclosed by Li. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve communication performance (See at least [0057] “The aspects presented herein may enable a UE to provide reporting including multiple SSB indices and associated measurements via group-based SSB subsets, which may facilitate improving communication performance”).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija, in view of Jian, in further view of Kumari (US 20230093364 A1), hereinafter Kumari.
Regarding claim 16, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 9. The combination of Haija and Jian does not explicitly disclose calibrating a position of the reflective device with respect to the first electronic device prior to transmitting the wireless signals. However, Kumari, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
calibrating a position of the reflective device with respect to the first electronic device prior to transmitting the wireless signals (See at least Fig. 4, Items 205-a, 405, [0105]-[0106] “[0105] At 405, UE 115-e, which may be a vehicle UE 115 in a V2X system, may receive signaling indicating configuration information for a reflection from assisting node 205-a. […] In some cases, the configuration information may include a […] calibration information, location information of assisting node 205-a, or a combination thereof. […] In some cases, assisting node 205-a may be an intelligent reflective surface (e.g., an RIS),”).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the calibration system disclosed by Kumari. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve reliability, coordination, and efficiency (See at least [0142] “which may cause improved communication reliability, reduced latency, improved user experience related to reduced processing, reduced power consumption, more efficient utilization of communication resources, improved coordination between devices, longer battery life, improved utilization of processing capability, and the like”).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija, in view of Jian, in further Kumari, in further view of Swan (US 20210390859 A1), hereinafter Swan.
Regarding claim 17, The combination of Haija, Jian, and Kumari, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 16. The combination of Haija, Jian and Kumari does not explicitly disclose calibrating the position comprises transmitting, using optics, optical signals to the reflective device and receiving, using the optics, reflected optical signals from the reflective device. However, Swan, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
calibrating the position comprises transmitting, using optics, optical signals to the reflective device and receiving, using the optics, reflected optical signals from the reflective device (See at least [0045] “the system 10 uses a corner optical reflectors 40 to calibrate the sensor position”, [0032] “The sensor 30 may be a camera, a radar sensor, or a lidar sensor” Swan discloses using a lidar sensor for calibration which as an active sensor requires transmission/reception of optical signals.).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the calibration system disclosed by Kumari with the optical calibration system disclosed by Swan. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve accuracy (See at least [0045] “This arrangement allows the sensor to pinpoint the exact location of the optical reflector accurately.”).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija, in view of Jian, in further view of Kumari, in further view of Lim (US 20220407666 A1), hereinafter Lim.
Regarding claim 18, The combination of Haija, Jian, and Kumari, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 16. The combination of Haija, Jian, and Kumari does not explicitly disclose calibrating the position comprises receiving ultra-wideband signals from a set of ultra-wideband antennas on the reflective device. However, Lim, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
calibrating the position comprises receiving ultra-wideband signals from a set of ultra-wideband antennas on the reflective device (See at least [0082] “The finding platform 230 may control the UWB finder 232 to activate a UWB communication circuit connected to a plurality of UWB antennas to receive a signal of a UWB channel used for positioning. The finding platform 230 may receive the UWB signal received from the second device 202 using the UWB communication circuit, and may estimate the location of the second device 202 based on an arrival time and/or arrival angle of the signal received by each of the plurality of UWB antenna” The Examiner notes that while the claims do not explicitly recite a ‘reflector’, the secondary device housing the UWB transmitter is analogous.).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the calibration system disclosed by Kumari with the ultra-wideband system disclosed by Lim. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously easily locate a device (See at least [0007] “easily discover the lost device, using, for example, ultra-wide band (UWB) communication”).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haija, in view of Jian, in further view of Oh (US 20140313897 A1), hereinafter Oh.
Regarding claim 26, The combination of Haija and Jian, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 13. The combination of Haija and Jian does not explicitly disclose the second RAT comprises an ultra-wideband (UWB) RAT, a wireless local area network (WLAN) RAT, or a wireless personal area network (WPAN) RAT. However, Oh, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
the second RAT comprises an ultra-wideband (UWB) RAT, a wireless local area network (WLAN) RAT, or a wireless personal area network (WPAN) RAT (See at least [0196] “backhaul link with each of at least one cooperative communication terminal may include not only a cellular modem such as GSM, WCDMA, and LTE but also a wireless communication RAT such as WiBro, WiFI, NFC, Bluetooth, UWB”).
Furthermore, 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 reflection system disclosed by Haija with the beam pointing system disclosed by Jian with the RAT system disclosed by Oh. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve communication performance (See at least [0081] “improving a signal quality through distributed transmission diversity transceiving”).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Allowance of claims 21-23 and 27-30 is indicated because:
None of the prior art of record teach or suggest the subject matter of independent claims 21 and 26. The prior art of record does not anticipate or render fairly obvious in combination to teach all of the additional limitations of the claimed invention, as best understood within the context of Applicant’s claimed invention as a whole, such as in claim 21 and similar claim 23, transmitting, using one or more antennas, radio-frequency signals using a first radio access technology (RAT) within a set of signal beams overlapping a plurality of reflectors on a reflective device concurrent with the plurality of reflectors being tilted in different respective physical orientations relative to a support structure of the reflective device; receiving, using a receiver and a second RAT different from the first RAT, a feedback signal associated with the wireless signals from the second electronic device, and similarly claim 27, reflecting, using at least one reflector from the plurality of reflectors, wireless data from the first electronic device to a second electronic device using at least one reflector from the plurality of reflectors, wherein the at least one reflector from the plurality of reflectors overlaps a signal beam from the set of signal beams that is selected, by the first electronic device, based on a feedback signal associated with the wireless signals that is transmitted by the second electronic device using a second RAT different than the first RAT,
Accordingly, claims 21, 23, and 27 are deemed to have allowable subject matter. Claims 22 and 28-30 would also be considered allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependence on allowable claims.
Claim 23 is 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH W GOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-4186. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha H Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/KENNETH W GOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights