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 with respect to claims 1, 21 and 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 9, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 20070041322, hereinafter “Choi”) and further in view of Smith et al. (US 7016401, hereinafter “Smith”).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses
A first wireless communication apparatus (a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) system can include first and second nodes in which transmissions from the first node to the second node are on a “downlink channel” and transmissions from the second node to the first node are on an “uplink channel” [0009]) comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive a data signal from a second wireless communication apparatus through a channel (the first node can estimate the uplink channel using a packet sent by the second node to the first node. This uplink channel can be transposed to provide an estimated downlink channel [0010]; a transmission from node 105 to node 106 is referenced herein as a "downlink" whereas a transmission from node 106 to node 105 is referenced as an "uplink". Note that the terms downlink and uplink merely describe the signal flow direction in a physical channel. Notably, the physical channels between node 105 and node 106 are reciprocal as long as both downlink and uplink channels use the same frequency [0021]-[0022]); and
a processing circuit (inherent feature in wireless communication node) configured to:
measure noise (The post-detection SNR per stream can be calculated from the channel and the noise floor with a priori knowledge of the MIMO receiver [0037], also see [0045]), a signal to noise ratio (SNR) (the SNR per stream can be defined after-an equalizer in the receiver chain, which is sometimes called "post-detection SNR", which advantageously measures the effect of the equalizer, [0036]-[0040]), and error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal (if feedback from the receiver node is supported, then an EVM can be measured at the receiver node any time a packet is transmitted at any output power level [0033]; The SNR at the decision device can be measured either by computing EVM with pilots (known signals) or by computing EVM with the data [0043]),
compare the SNR with the EVM (In step 406 (in one embodiment, an optional step), node 105 can adjust the estimated post-detection SNR for each rate at node 106 with the transmitter EVM per power tables of node 105 and node 106, if necessary (e.g. when the transmitter EVM is not negligible (e.g. if the EVM is more than 10 dB below the SNR) [0045]).
However, Choi does not explicitly disclose, selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor.
In the same field of endeavor, Smith discloses, selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor (The SNR analyzer 106 uses the soft decision data 116 and the information obtained by applying the EVM mask 117 to analyze the true soft decision data SNR of the digitally modulated signal relative to an acceptable SNR defined by the EVM mask 1117. If the SNR is found to be acceptable, no further analysis is needed. However, if the SNR is found to be deficient, the soft decision data 116 are provided to impairment correlator 108, Col. 5; lines 22-Col. 6; lines 23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Choi by specifically providing selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor, as taught by Smith for the purpose of providing a technique which can be used to identify, isolate, and classify different types of impairment, therefore sources of impairments may be determined precisely (abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Choi and Smith teaches everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), in addition Smith teaches, 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 (From the calculated EVM, a decision can be made as to whether or not the EVM threshold had been breached, which would imply that the SNR is lower than desired. A multi-tiered set of EVM masks may be used to improve the granularity of the EVM and, therefore, the SNR estimate, Fig. 8; 14-67).
Regarding claim 9, Choi and Smith teaches everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), in addition Smith teaches, 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 (From the calculated EVM, a decision can be made as to whether or not the EVM threshold had been breached, which would imply that the SNR is lower than desired. A multi-tiered set of EVM masks may be used to improve the granularity of the EVM and, therefore, the SNR estimate, Fig. 8; 14-67).
Regarding claim 21, Choi discloses
A first wireless communication apparatus (a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) system can include first and second nodes in which transmissions from the first node to the second node are on a “downlink channel” and transmissions from the second node to the first node are on an “uplink channel” [0009]) comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive a data signal from a second wireless communication apparatus through a channel (the first node can estimate the uplink channel using a packet sent by the second node to the first node. This uplink channel can be transposed to provide an estimated downlink channel [0010]; a transmission from node 105 to node 106 is referenced herein as a "downlink" whereas a transmission from node 106 to node 105 is referenced as an "uplink". Note that the terms downlink and uplink merely describe the signal flow direction in a physical channel. Notably, the physical channels between node 105 and node 106 are reciprocal as long as both downlink and uplink channels use the same frequency [0021]-[0022]); and
a processing circuit (inherent feature in wireless communication node) configured to:
measure noise (The post-detection SNR per stream can be calculated from the channel and the noise floor with a priori knowledge of the MIMO receiver [0037], also see [0045]), a signal to noise ratio (SNR) (the SNR per stream can be defined after-an equalizer in the receiver chain, which is sometimes called "post-detection SNR", which advantageously measures the effect of the equalizer, [0036]-[0040]), and error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal (if feedback from the receiver node is supported, then an EVM can be measured at the receiver node any time a packet is transmitted at any output power level [0033]; The SNR at the decision device can be measured either by computing EVM with pilots (known signals) or by computing EVM with the data [0043]),
However, Choi does not explicitly disclose, compare the SNR with the EVM whether data signal is impaired, selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor.
In the same field of endeavor, Smith discloses, compare the SNR with the EVM whether data signal is impaired (The SNR analyzer 106 uses the soft decision data 116 and the information obtained by applying the EVM mask 117 to analyze the true soft decision data SNR of the digitally modulated signal relative to an acceptable SNR defined by the EVM mask 1117, Col 5; lines 23-30), selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor (The SNR analyzer 106 uses the soft decision data 116 and the information obtained by applying the EVM mask 117 to analyze the true soft decision data SNR of the digitally modulated signal relative to an acceptable SNR defined by the EVM mask 1117. If the SNR is found to be acceptable, no further analysis is needed. However, if the SNR is found to be deficient, the soft decision data 116 are provided to impairment correlator 108, Col. 5; lines 22-Col. 6; lines 23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Choi by specifically providing compare the SNR with the EVM whether data signal is impaired, selectively perform a correction operation on the noise, based on a result of the comparison of the SNR with the EVM and a scaling factor, as taught by Smith for the purpose of providing a technique which can be used to identify, isolate, and classify different types of impairment, therefore sources of impairments may be determined precisely (abstract).
Regarding claim 22, Choi discloses
A first wireless communication apparatus (a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) system can include first and second nodes in which transmissions from the first node to the second node are on a “downlink channel” and transmissions from the second node to the first node are on an “uplink channel” [0009]) comprising:
a transceiver configured to receive a data signal from a second wireless communication apparatus through a channel (the first node can estimate the uplink channel using a packet sent by the second node to the first node. This uplink channel can be transposed to provide an estimated downlink channel [0010]; a transmission from node 105 to node 106 is referenced herein as a "downlink" whereas a transmission from node 106 to node 105 is referenced as an "uplink". Note that the terms downlink and uplink merely describe the signal flow direction in a physical channel. Notably, the physical channels between node 105 and node 106 are reciprocal as long as both downlink and uplink channels use the same frequency [0021]-[0022]); and
a processing circuit (inherent feature in wireless communication node) configured to:
measure noise (The post-detection SNR per stream can be calculated from the channel and the noise floor with a priori knowledge of the MIMO receiver [0037], also see [0045]), a signal to noise ratio (SNR) (the SNR per stream can be defined after-an equalizer in the receiver chain, which is sometimes called "post-detection SNR", which advantageously measures the effect of the equalizer, [0036]-[0040]), and error vector magnitude (EVM) of the data signal (if feedback from the receiver node is supported, then an EVM can be measured at the receiver node any time a packet is transmitted at any output power level [0033]; The SNR at the decision device can be measured either by computing EVM with pilots (known signals) or by computing EVM with the data [0043]),
compare the SNR with the EVM (In step 406 (in one embodiment, an optional step), node 105 can adjust the estimated post-detection SNR for each rate at node 106 with the transmitter EVM per power tables of node 105 and node 106, if necessary (e.g. when the transmitter EVM is not negligible (e.g. if the EVM is more than 10 dB below the SNR) [0045]).
However, Choi does not explicitly disclose, perform a correction operation on the noise based on determining that a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeds a threshold value.
In the same field of endeavor, Smith discloses, perform a correction operation on the noise based on determining that a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeds a threshold value (The SNR analyzer 106 uses the soft decision data 116 and the information obtained by applying the EVM mask 117 to analyze the true soft decision data SNR of the digitally modulated signal relative to an acceptable SNR defined by the EVM mask 1117. If the SNR is found to be acceptable, no further analysis is needed. However, if the SNR is found to be deficient, the soft decision data 116 are provided to impairment correlator 108, Col. 5; lines 22-Col. 6; lines 23; From the calculated EVM, a decision can be made as to whether or not the EVM threshold had been breached, which would imply that the SNR is lower than desired. A multi-tiered set of EVM masks may be used to improve the granularity of the EVM and, therefore, the SNR estimate, Fig. 8; 14-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Choi by specifically providing perform a correction operation on the noise based on determining that a difference between the SNR and the EVM exceeds a threshold value, as taught by Smith for the purpose of providing a technique which can be used to identify, isolate, and classify different types of impairment, therefore sources of impairments may be determined precisely (abstract).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view Smith and further in view of Safavi (US 8325858, hereinafter “Safavi”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Choi and Smith discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 2), however the combination of Choi and Smith 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 the combination of Choi and Smith by specifically providing 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view Smith, and further in view of Venkatesh et al. (US 9112744, hereinafter “Venkatesh”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Choi and Smith discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1), however the combination of Choi and Smith 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 the combination of Choi and Smith by specifically providing 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, 7 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, Choi and Smith, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the scaling factor is first scaling factor and 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, Choi and Smith, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the scaling factor is second scaling factor and the processing circuit is further configured to: generate the 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, Choi and Smith, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising wherein the scaling factor is third scaling factor and the processing circuit is further configured to: generate the 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.
Regarding claim 7, The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior arts, Choi and Smith, whether taken alone or in combination does not teach the following novel feature: “The first wireless communication apparatus comprising 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, and 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, andmeasure the EVM by using data in at least one SIG field of the plurality of SIG fields”, in combination with the other limitations in claim 1.
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
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 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 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
Prosecution Insights