DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 10-13, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Herath et al. (US 2024/0146408, “Herath”).
Regarding claim 1, Herath discloses a method for wireless communication, comprising:
- receiving a triggering signal transmitted by a network device (See 1601 Fig.16, the backscatter device is activated by ‘device activate’ message transmitted by gNB/BS and alternatively, a receiver can perform activation as an optional, See 1601); and
- transmitting a back scattering signal to the network device (See 1605 Fig.16, the receiver sends the backscattering signal to gNB; See Fig.1E, the backscatter device sends backscattered signal to backscatter receiver),
- wherein the back scattering signal is a signal formed by reflecting and modulating a power supply signal transmitted by a power supply node in a manner of Code Division Multiplexing (CDM) (See ¶.92, the signal output by the load modulator may be one symbol or a sequence of symbols from the constellation implemented by the impedances in the load modulator. As a result, the reflected signal mimics modulation; See ¶.94, the signal blocker may for example be implemented with diodes and/or transistors or other circuits and RF components that allow a signal with a frequency ΔF to pass through (to generate the shifted carrier), but block signals at the shifted carrier frequency (to avoid the power loss in the backscattered/reflected signal; See ¶.4, because a backscatter device utilizes an external carrier signal to modulate its data, it can be considered a passive device from a carrier signal generation point of view. As a result, a backscatter device can be low-cost and can operate with low power consumption, at least in comparison to an active device; See 1502 Fig.15, the backscatter device receives ‘carrier signal’ from a carrier communications; See 1602 Fig.16, the backscatter device receives ‘ambient RF signal’ from an ambient RF source; See ¶.245, backscatter device multiplexing occurs based on a combination of FDM and/or CDM).
Regarding claim 2, Herath discloses “an uplink frame structure used for the back scattering signal comprises at least one reflection period, each of the at least one reflection period comprises at least one reflection time unit (See Fig.2 and ¶.91, the shifted carrier reflects off the connected impedance; See Fig.9 and Fig.14), each of the at least one reflection time unit comprises at least one Guard Period (GP) (See Fig.14 and ¶.253, guard period) and at least one reflection time segment, and each of the at least one reflection time segment is a transmitting occasion of the back scattering signal (See ¶.5, the different carrier time segments represent different times that backscatter devices can make backscatter transmissions; See ¶.101, the carrier signal, while it is on, is divided into carrier time segments. Each carrier time segment has a specified time offset from the beginning of the carrier signal burst. The different carrier time segments represent different times that backscatter devices can make backscatter transmissions).”
Regarding claim 3, Herath discloses “the reflection time unit comprises a GP and a reflection time segment, wherein the GP is before the reflection time segment, or the GP is after the reflection time segment, wherein the at least one reflection period is a plurality of reflection periods, and the plurality of reflection periods are continuous or discontinuous in a time domain (See Fig.14 and ¶.254-259, transmission time unit (UT) and GP).”
Regarding claim 4, Herath discloses “acquiring a first base sequence for a terminal device from a plurality of base sequences (See ¶.13, generating the backscattered signal involves performing scrambling of symbols output by the modulating data using a scrambling sequence. A symbol alphabet of symbols output by scrambling is the same as a symbol alphabet of symbols output of said modulating data. The scrambling sequence is predefined and at least in part defines the transmission resource to be used by the backscatter device), wherein the plurality of base sequences are respectively used for distinguishing a plurality of terminal devices, and the plurality of terminal devices comprise the terminal device (See ¶.5, the combination of a specific carrier time segment, a specific frequency shift and a specific spreading/scrambling code, when used, together constitutes a specific backscatter transmission opportunity, also referred to herein as a transmission unit (TU) and a backscatter transmission channel; See further ¶.167); and performing reflection and spread-spectrum on the power supply signal in the manner of CDM based on the first base sequence, to obtain the back scattering signal, or performing spread-spectrum on a modulation signal in the manner of CDM based on the first base sequence, to obtain the back scattering signal (See Fig.5-6 and ¶.91-92, carrier reflect; See ¶.144-147, spread/scrambled sequence), wherein the modulation signal is a signal formed by reflecting and modulating the power supply signal based on information to be transmitted of the terminal device (See ¶.4, backscatter device utilizes an external carrier signal to modulate its data, it can be considered a passive device from a carrier signal generation point of view. As a result, a backscatter device can be low-cost and can operate with low power consumption, at least in comparison to an active device; See further ¶.8 and ¶.12-19 for modulating data using a spreading sequence).”
Regarding claim 10, it is a method claim performed by a network node corresponding to the method claim at the receiving side and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 11-13, they are claims corresponding to claims 2-4, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 19, it is a terminal device claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations “a processor, a memory, and a transceiver (See Fig.1C, a processor, a memory, a transmitter, and a receive)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 20, it is a network device claim corresponding to the method claim 10, except the limitations “a processor, a memory, and a transceiver (See Fig.1C, a processor, a memory, a transmitter, and a receive)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
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 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herath in view of Luo et al. (US 2009/0046702, “Luo”).
Regarding claim 6, Herath does not explicitly disclose what Luo discloses “at least one of the following applies: cross-correlations among different base sequences in the plurality of base sequences are less than or equal to a first threshold; or an autocorrelation of each of the plurality of base sequences is greater than or equal to a second threshold (Luo, See ¶.96, selection of a particular sequence index based at least in part on cross-correlation being equal or lower than the threshold correlation; See Fig.4 and ¶.81, base sequence; See ¶.124, CDM).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “at least one of the following applies: cross-correlations among different base sequences in the plurality of base sequences are less than or equal to a first threshold; or an autocorrelation of each of the plurality of base sequences is greater than or equal to a second threshold” as taught by Luo into the system of Herath, so that it provides a way for signals strongly correlated with other signals to often exhibit high interference, thus minimal cross-correlation can be desired (Luo, See ¶.96).
Regarding claim 15, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 6 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herath in view of Yan et al. (US 2022/0278886, “Yan”).
Regarding claim 7, Herath does not explicitly disclose what Yan discloses “the plurality of base sequences comprise a Discrete Fourier Transformation (DFT) sequence or a pseudo random sequence, wherein the pseudo random sequence comprises at least one of an M sequence or a Gold sequence (Yan, See ¶.139, the pseudo-random signal may be generated by any one of the following sequences: an m-sequence, a Gold sequence, etc.; See ¶.168, DFT sequence).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the plurality of base sequences comprise a Discrete Fourier Transformation (DFT) sequence or a pseudo random sequence, wherein the pseudo random sequence comprises at least one of an M sequence or a Gold sequence” as taught by Yan into the system of Herath, so that it provides a way of having some statistical characteristics similar to those of random noise (Yan, See ¶.139).
Regarding claim 16, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 7 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 8, 9, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herath in view of Elkotby et al. (US 2022/0225402, “Elkotby”).
Regarding claim 8, Herath discloses “the back scattering signal is a signal formed by reflecting and modulating the power supply signal in the manner of CDM and a manner of Frequency Division Duplex (FDD), wherein transmitting the back scattering signal to the network device comprises: (See ¶.222, a receiver specific TDM group is defined and devices communicating to the same receiver use the same TDM group. Each device uses a device specific TU; device specific TUs are separated by FDM and/or CDM; Examiner’s Note; Elkotby discloses FDD), determining a second frequency band according to a first offset and a first frequency band, wherein the first frequency band is at least one of a frequency band where the triggering signal is located or a frequency band where the power supply signal is located; and transmitting, on the second frequency band, the back scattering signal to the network device (See ¶.259, backscatter devices find their corresponding receivers by searching for dedicated TUs. For example, dedicated TUs may be used to transmit a specific sequence that devices search to locate receivers and obtain the backscatter communication information; See ¶.5, each carrier time segment has a specified time offset from the beginning, also referred to as a start time, of the carrier signal burst. The different carrier time segments represent different times that backscatter devices can make backscatter transmissions; See ¶.95, a selected frequency offset ΔF).”
Herath discloses a CDM and a FDM, but does not explicitly disclose what Elkotby discloses the limitation “a manner of CDM and a manner of Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) (Elkotby, ¶.199, backscattering techniques considering either time division, frequency division, code division multiplexing or combination of these options).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “a manner of CDM and a manner of Frequency Division Duplex (FDD)” as taught by Elkotby into the system of Herath, so that it provides a way of employing backscattering techniques in the combination of a CDM and frequency division (Elkotby, See ¶.199).
Regarding claim 9, Herath discloses “the back scattering signal is a signal formed by reflecting and modulating the power supply signal in the manner of CDM and a manner of Time Division Duplex (TDD) (Herath, See Fig.1E, Figs.15-17; See ¶.221, a receiver specific FDM group is defined and devices communicating to the same receiver use the same FDM group. Each device uses a device specific TU; device specific TUs are separated using TDM and/or CDM; Examiner’s Note: Elkotby discloses “TDD”), wherein transmitting the back scattering signal to the network device comprises: determining a second reflection time unit according to a second offset and a first reflection time unit, wherein the first reflection time unit is at least one of a frequency band where the triggering signal is located or a reflection time unit where the power supply signal is located; and transmitting, on the second reflection time unit, the back scattering signal to the network device (See Fig.14-17 for reflection time unit and sending the signals to gNB/BS).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, they are claims corresponding to claims 8 & 9, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 14 are 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411