Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. It would be of great assistance to the office if all incoming papers pertaining to a filed application carried the following items:
i. Application number (checked for accuracy, including series code and serial no.).
ii. Group art unit number (copied from most recent Office communication).
iii. Filing date.
iv. Name of the examiner who prepared the most recent Office action.
v. Title of invention.
vi. Confirmation number (See MPEP § 503).
3. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
4. Claim interpretation: When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations doesn’t have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional.
Claim Rejection- 35 USC 112
5. The following is a quotation of the second paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 2 & 14 are rejected under 35 USC112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Claims 2 & 14 recites the limitation “such that” in line 2. The limitation is indefinite and vague. Further correction is required. (See MPEP 2173.05 (d)).
Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 102
6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 13 & 15 are rejected under 35 USC 102 as being clearly anticipated by Tobisu et al (Pub No. US 2017/0077981).
Regarding claim 1, Tobisu et al discloses a circuit comprising: a passive intermodulation (PIM) model circuit (Fig. 1 & 7) configured to process first data to generate a PIM interference model output to be concatenated with second data (Para. 40-43 & Fig. 1 & 7: PIM-214/ 212 to process first data output to be concatenated with second data-parameter adjusted-216 and output adjusted data), the second data including a first carrier frequency and a second carrier frequency (Para. 43 & 6 & 25: multicarrier signals with data containing carriers at multiple frequencies, multiple different transmission frequency bands); and a PIM model adapt circuit configured to receive frequency shifted captured data (Para. 50: the frequency shifting unit 301 shifts the frequency of the PIM waveform by the difference between the center frequency of the reception frequency band and the center frequency of the PIM) and frequency shifted PIM models to generate updated values to compensate for PIM interference after the PIM interference model output is concatenated with the second data (Para. 59-60: Frequency shifting for the PIM and generate updated signals & Fig. 4 & 7: generate and output 2nd data signal from parameter adjustment of the PIM & Para. 41: update the distortion compensation).
Regarding claim 13, Tobisu et al discloses a method comprising: processing first data, by a passive intermodulation (PIM) model circuit (Fig. 1 & 7), to generate a PIM interference model output to be concatenated with second data (Para. 40-43 & Fig. 1 & 7: PIM-214/ 212 to process first data output to be concatenated with second data-parameter adjusted-216 and output adjusted data), the second data including a first carrier frequency and a second carrier frequency (Para. 43 & 6 & 25: multicarrier signals with data containing carriers at multiple frequencies, multiple different transmission frequency bands); and receiving, by a PIM model adapt circuit, frequency shifted captured data and frequency shifted PIM models to generate updated values to compensate for PIM interference after the PIM interference model output is concatenated with the second data (Para. 50 & Para. 59-60: Frequency shifting for the PIM and generate updated signals & Fig. 4 & 7: generate and output 2nd data signal from parameter adjustment of the PIM & Para. 41: update the distortion compensation).
Regarding claim 3 & 15, Tobisu et al discloses the second data includes PIM interference data, an uplink receiving signal, and noise interference data (Fig. 7: Data signal from PIM waveform-212/214 & reception BB signal & distortion signals-211) & (Fig. 8).
Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 103
7. 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 2 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobisu et al (Pub No. US 2017/0077981) and further in view of Li et al (Pub No. US 2022/0247432).
Regarding claim 2 & 14, Note the rejection as set forth above, Tobisu et al does not explicitly disclose PIM model adapt circuit is used in an intermediate frequency (IF) domain such that the first carrier frequency and the second carrier frequency are jointly adapted at the IF domain.
In a similar field of endeavor, Li et al discloses PIM model adapt circuit is used in an intermediate frequency (IF) domain such that the first carrier frequency and the second carrier frequency are jointly adapted at the IF domain (Para. 80: Using intermediate frequency and multiple carrier frequencies are at the intermediate frequency region).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use selected frequency domain the transceiver system to adjust and control proper frequency to minimize signal distortions.
Claims 4-12 & 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tobisu et al (Pub No. US 2017/0077981) and further in view of Gravely et al (Pub No. US 2018/0123633).
Regarding claim 4 & 9 & 16, Tobisu et al does not explicitly disclose the second data is split into cyclic prefix (CP) data and corresponding data.
Gravely et al discloses the second data is split into cyclic prefix (CP) data and corresponding data (Para. 49 & 70: cyclic prefix (CP) data & corresponding data).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use cyclic prefix data in the transceiver unit to adjust data in the system.
Regarding claim 5 & 17, Tobisu et al does not explicitly disclose the CP data and the corresponding data are part of orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbols.
Gravely et al discloses the CP data and the corresponding data are part of orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbols (Para. 70: OFDM symbols).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use orthogonal frequency division multiplexing in the transceiver device to process the proper signal in the system.
Regarding claim 6 & 18, Note the rejection set forth above, Tobisu et al discloses data is frequency shifted separately than the corresponding data within a double buffer structure (Para. 50: Shifting frequency data).
Regarding claim 7 & 19, Note the rejection set forth above, Tobisu et al discloses the corresponding data is phase shifted within the double buffer structure (Para. 50: Shifting frequency data).
Regarding claim 8 & 20, Tobisu et al does not explicitly disclose frequency shifted and phase shifted by +/- 10 KHz.
Gravely et al discloses frequency shifted and phase shifted between +/- 10 KHz (Para. 126: frequency shift of 1Khz & Para. 170).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use phase and frequency shifting in the transceiver device to process the proper signal in the system.
Regarding claim 10, Tobisu et al does not explicitly disclose the first PIM model related to the CP data is frequency shifted separately than the second PIM model related to the corresponding data.
Gravely et al discloses the first PIM model related to the CP data is frequency shifted separately than the second PIM model related to the corresponding data (Para. 49 & 70: cyclic prefix (CP) data & corresponding data).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use cyclic prefix data in the transceiver unit to adjust data in the system.
Regarding claim 11, Note the rejection set forth above, Tobisu et al discloses the second PIM model related to the corresponding data is phase shifted (Para. 50: Shifting frequency data & Fig. 4: phase adjust-303).
Regarding claim 12, Note the rejection set forth above, Tobisu et al discloses first trigger information is aligned with a starting point of the data and the second trigger information is aligned with a starting point of the corresponding data (Fig. 4 & 7 & Para. 59-60: Data align and adjusted).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD K TALUKDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3222. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur from 10 am to 6 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, Wesley Kim can be reached on 571-272-7867. 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.
/MD K TALUKDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648