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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-9) in the reply filed on 01/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION APPARATUS AND OPERATING METHOD THAT POTENTIALLY CORRECTS NOISE FOR A DATA SIGNAL
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (US 20070053452, hereinafter “Koo”) and further in view Sun et al. (US 7826521, hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 1, Koo discloses,
A first wireless communication apparatus (Fig. 2; WTRU 110) comprising:
a transceiver (i.e., combination of transmitter 117 and receiver 116, Fig. 2) configured to receive a data signal from a second wireless communication apparatus through a channel (In step 410, the receiver 116 of the WTRU 110 receives the HT dataframe 300, [0025]); and
a processing circuit (Fig. 2; processor 115) configured to:
measure noise (noise power estimated, Fig. 4; step 430), a signal to noise ratio (SNR) (In Fig.4; step 450, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is calculated).
However, Koo does not disclose, measure error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal, compare the SNR with the EVM, and selectively perform, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM, a correction operation on the noise.
In the same field of endeavor, Sun discloses, measure error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal (In technique 500, step 501 may estimate an EVM of the pilots for each data symbol in a packet, Col. 7; lines 64-66), compare the SNR with the EVM (Col. 3; lines 28-Col. 4; lines 44 teaches relating EVM values to SNR and comparing EVM-derived quality indicators with other signal quality estimates), and selectively perform, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM, a correction operation on the noise (FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary technique 500 for generating a PER estimation based on first and second order moments of EVM for rate adaptation. In general, technique 500 estimates the PER for a given rate from the EVM measurements and maps it into a throughput for a given rate. Rate adaptation then selects the rate that maximizes the throughput, Col. 7; lines 51-Col. 8; lines 31). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Koo by specifically providing measure error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal, compare the SNR with the EVM, and selectively perform, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM, a correction operation on the noise, as taught by Sun for the purpose of providing an accurate rate adaptation technique for RF devices supporting spatial multiplexing MIMO communication (Col. 1; lines 24-27).
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo, in view Sun, and further in view of Inanoglu et al. (US 8000382, hereinafter “Inanoglu”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Koo and Sun discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however the combination of Koo and Sun does not disclose, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM being less than a threshold value, skip the correction operation on the noise.
In the same field of endeavor, Inanoglu discloses, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeding a threshold value, perform the correction operation on the noise, based on the difference between the SNR and the EVM (The applicants have observed that the sources and types of interference that must be addressed to preserve and/or increase communication system performance change as the performance of the communication system changes. For example, thermal noise and quantization error may be the most prominent sources of interference when signal to noise ratio (SNR) is low. Once higher SNR's are achieved, however, other types of interference, such as in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) phase imbalance, take center stage and so, in some systems, must be corrected to achieve high data rates, Col. 5; lines 1-5…. At block 304, a system executing this method enters calibration mode. In the exemplary embodiment of FIG. 2, this act is accomplished by engaging the calibration control switch 210. Once calibration mode is established, the transmitter can transmit a signal to the receiver over a local, loopback connection. Calibration mode provides several advantages over other modes of communication including a relatively high SNR, e.g. greater than 32 dB, Col. 7; lines 3-19. Note: This citation clearly teaches comparing SNR with IQ imbalance metrics (EVM reflects IQ imbalance)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Koo and Sun by specifically providing wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeding a threshold value, perform the correction operation on the noise, based on the difference between the SNR and the EVM, as taught by Inanoglu for the purpose of providing a technique that improves wireless communication by producing accurate estimation and correction of phase imbalance (Col. 1; lines 53-56).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Koo and Sun discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however the combination of Koo and Sun does not disclose, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeding a threshold value, perform the correction operation on the noise, based on the difference between the SNR and the EVM.
In the same field of endeavor, Inanoglu discloses, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM being less than a threshold value, skip the correction operation on the noise (thermal noise and quantization error may be the most prominent sources of interference when signal to noise ratio (SNR) is low. Once higher SNR's are achieved, however, other types of interference, such as in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) phase imbalance, take center stage and so, in some systems, must be corrected to achieve high data rates, Col. 5; lines 1-25… Calibration mode provides several advantages over other modes of communication including a relatively high SNR, e.g. greater than 32 dB, Col. 7; lines 3-19. Note: This citation clearly teaches comparing SNR with IQ imbalance metrics (EVM reflects IQ imbalance)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Koo and Sun by specifically providing wherein the processing circuit is further configured to, based on a difference between the SNR and the EVM being less than a threshold value, skip the correction operation on the noise, as taught by Inanoglu for the purpose of providing a technique that improves wireless communication by producing accurate estimation and correction of phase imbalance (Col. 1; lines 53-56).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo, in view Sun, in view of Inanoglu and further in view of Safavi (US 8325858, hereinafter “Safavi”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Koo, Sun and Inanoglu discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 2), however the combination of Koo, Sun and Inanoglu does not disclose, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: generate replacement noise based on the EVM, and perform the correction operation on the noise by replacing the noise with the replacement noise.
In the same field of endeavor, Safavi discloses, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: generate replacement noise based on the EVM (the variance for the decision directed noise is converted to a true noise variance per packet. The variance for the decision directed noise is converted to a true noise variance per symbol. These conversions may be made using a lookup table and interpolation. For example, a conversion table may be stored in a memory of a device implementing the systems and methods described herein. The variance of the decision directed noise is mapped to a true noise variance per packet, a true noise variance per symbol, or both, based on values stored in the memory, Fig. 2 and Col. 7; lines 7-27), and perform the correction operation on the noise by replacing the noise with the replacement noise (The data aided noise variance computation block includes block 202. This block 202 computes the variance for true noise based on the EVM using a long-term data algorithm and a block 216 that processes the noise averaging and switching algorithm. EVM Probe data 220 is input into the block 200 for this calculation, Col. 7; lines 51-Col. 8; lines 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: generate replacement noise based on the EVM, and perform the correction operation on the noise by replacing the noise with the replacement noise, as taught by Safavi for the purpose of providing coding gains in the presence of both additive white Gaussian noise and interference (Col. 2; lines 35-37).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo, in view Sun, and further in view of Vijayan et al. (US 20190394730, hereinafter “Vijayan”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Koo and Sun discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), further Koo discloses, wherein a frame format of the data signal comprises: a first legacy-long training field (L-LTF) comprising first data having a first pattern; a second L-LTF comprising second data having the first pattern; and a plurality of signal (SIG) fields (The legacy preamble 310 includes a legacy short training field (L-STF) 311, a legacy long training field (L-LTF) 312, and a legacy signal field (L-SIG) 313. The L-STF 311, L-LTF 312, and the L-SIG 313 are substantially similar to the L-STF 11, L-LTF 12, and L-SIG 13 fields respectively of the legacy dataframe 10, Fig. 3 and [0019]-[0021]).
However, the combination of Koo and Sun does not disclose, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: measure the noise and the SNR by using data in the first L-LTF and the second L-LTF, and measure the EVM by using data in at least one SIG field of the plurality of SIG fields.
In the same field of endeavor, Vijayan discloses, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: measure the noise and the SNR by using data in the first L-LTF and the second L-LTF (during a preamble interval, the receiver detecting that the preamble has an SINR which is below an acceptable preamble threshold, during a preamble interval or during a header and payload interval, the receiver detecting that subcarriers in one frequency extent of a channel have an energy level which is different than the energy level of subcarriers in a different frequency extent of the channel, [0011]-[0013]), and measure the EVM by using data in at least one SIG field of the plurality of SIG fields (The EVM computer 642 computes an error vector magnitude for each symbol based on the formula]..where n is the symbol index, k is the subcarrier index, H is the channel estimate as described above, Y is the received OFDM symbol after FFT, and X is the receiver estimate of the transmitted symbol constellation, [0041]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: measure the noise and the SNR by using data in the first L-LTF and the second L-LTF, and measure the EVM by using data in at least one SIG field of the plurality of SIG fields, as taught by Vijayan for the purpose of robustly detecting interfering transmissions and powering down the receiver to avoid wasting stored battery energy when attempting to receive packets during interference from other access points [0006].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo, in view Sun, and further in view of Venkatesh et al. (US 9112744, hereinafter “Venkatesh”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Koo and Sun discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however the combination of Koo and Sun does not disclose, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to perform a whitening operation on the data signal, based on a corrected noise resulting from the correction operation. In the same field of endeavor, Venkatesh discloses, wherein the processing circuit is further configured to perform a whitening operation on the data signal, based on a corrected noise resulting from the correction operation (The method further includes determining a noise scaling factor s, wherein the noise scaling factor s is a ratio of variance of noise at the receiving device to a variance of noise at the transmitting device, and determining, using the channel estimate H and the noise scaling factor s, a noise whitening matrix W, Col. 1; lines 45-52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wherein the processing circuit is further configured to perform a whitening operation on the data signal, based on a corrected noise resulting from the correction operation, as taught by Venkatesh for the purpose of increasing sensitivity of the receiver, by allowing, for increased range of transmissions, increased data throughput (Col. 3; lines 12-16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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.
Regarding claim 3, The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior arts, Koo, Sun and Inanoglu, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: multiply the difference between the SNR and the EVM by a first scaling factor, and perform, based on a result of the multiplication, the correction operation on the noise by adjusting a Q factor determined by the noise”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 1 and claim 2.
Regarding claim 4, The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior arts, Koo, Sun and Inanoglu, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: generate a second scaling factor, based on the difference between the SNR and the EVM, and perform the correction operation on the noise by multiplying the noise by the second scaling factor”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 1 and claim 2.
Regarding claim 5, The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior arts, Koo, Sun and Inanoglu, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: generate a third scaling factor, based on the difference between the SNR and the EVM, and perform the correction operation on the noise by multiplying a reciprocal of a standard deviation of the noise by the third scaling factor”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 1 and claim 2.
Prior Art of the Record:
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to
Applicant’s disclosure:
US 9166828: A method for estimating and compensating for noise on antennas of a multi-antenna wireless system. The method includes receiving multiple signals via multiple receive antennas of a receiver, where each of the signals is received via a respective antenna. The method further includes estimating noise power imbalance corresponding to the receive antennas based on the multiple signals.
US 8804873: A communication system includes a transmitter having a peak controller which controls PAPR to operate in accordance with a noise constraint. A backoff controller operates in conjunction with an amplifier section to cause the amplifier section to maximize the amplification it applies while maintaining a predetermined degree of amplifier linearity.
US 20230224826: Methods, systems, and devices for including power reporting for network power modification are described. That is, a user equipment (UE) and a base station may exchange signaling supporting an MPR update at the UE. In some examples, the UE may transmit, to the base station, a request for resources for performing channel measurements in accordance with a power reduction update associated with the UE.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GOLAM SOROWAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3761. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at (571) 272-7904. 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.
/GOLAM SOROWAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641