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 Election/Restriction
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of response to election/restriction, dated December 8, 2025.
The Applicant has elected Group II, including claims 3-20. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of information disclosure statement (IDS), dated on April 24, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
4. The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Paragraph [0004] in the specification recites as follows:
[0004] Bluetooth devices transmit data in protocol data units (PDU), which represent the smallest unit of data that the Bluetooth protocol can carry. (The terms PDU and “packet” are often used interchangeably.). PDUs can include various types of data, such as control information, user data, headers, and other information for proper communication. In general, PDUs are used to organize and encapsulate data for transmission within the Bluetooth protocol. There are several types of PDUs used by BLE, including without limitation advertising PDUs, which are used to broadcast information about a device's presence and capabilities to other devices; data PDUs, which carry substantive data, such as user information or application-specific data; control PDUs, which include control and management information for establishing, maintaining, and terminating BLE connections, and response PDUs, which are used to respond to specific requests or commands in the Bluetooth protocol.
Acronyms, e.g., PDU, PDUs, BLE, etc., appear multiple times in paragraph [0004]. The examiner objects the usage of the term “protocol data units (PDU)” as indicated in italics above, and suggests amending it to “protocol data units (PDUs),” so it goes along with the PDUs presented in other sentences.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 3-20 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 3, it recites, “A device, comprising:
Circuitry to enable a plurality of physical layer blocks, the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY);
circuitry to enable a plurality of receivers, the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block,
circuitry to detect an incoming packet with the first physical layer block;
circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY;
circuitry to update the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY.”
Claim 3 is an apparatus claim, comprising a circuitry to perform multiple functions, e.g., to enable, to detect, etc. The examiner objects the usage of the ending term “physical layer configuration (PHY)” as indicated in italics in the first “to enable” function, and suggests amending it to “physical layer configuration (PLC),” so it goes along with the acronym usage in the telecommunications industry.
Consequently, it is suggested to amend the term “the first Bluetooth PHY,” as indicated in italics in the “to determine” and “to update” functions, to “the first Bluetooth PLC.”
Same rational applies to the usage of the term “PHY” in claim 20.
Claims 4-19 are objected to since these claims all depend from claim 3.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
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.
7. Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Regarding claim 20, it recites, “A method, comprising:
enabling a plurality of physical layer blocks, the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY);
enabling a plurality of receivers, the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block,
detecting an incoming packet with the first physical layer block;
determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY; and
updating the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY.”
Claim 20 is a method-step claim, comprising multiple functions, e.g., enabling, detecting, etc. The examiner rejects the claim, since there is a lack of antecedent basis for the usage of the term “the device” as indicated in italics in the last function, i.e., updating function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
9. 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.
(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.
10. Claims 3-5, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by de Ruijter et al. (US 2018/0048499).
Regarding claim 3, de Ruijter et al. teach the device (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: the device, e.g., multimode demodulator 300 illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “device” in the instant application), comprising:
circuitry to enable a plurality of physical layer blocks (paragraphs [0002] lines 1-5 & [0003] lines 1-9; Examiner’s Notes: the PHY modes in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of physical layer blocks” in the instant application),
the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY) (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: an optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY);”
in fact, the multiple PHY modes including a PHY mode implementing the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration” in the instant application);
circuitry to enable a plurality of receivers (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: the demodulators, e.g., Demod1 and Demod2 depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of receivers” in the instant application),
the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block (paragraph [0048] lines 1-7; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 illustrated in FIG. 3 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first receiver;”
in fact, Demod1 in communication with the PHY mode regards to the Bluetooth 2.0, as illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block” in the instant application),
circuitry to detect an incoming packet with the first physical layer block (paragraph [0048] lines 1-7; Examiner’s Notes: Preamble detector 1 detecting an incoming bit stream/packet with the PHY mode regards to the Bluetooth 2.0, as illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to detect an incoming packet with the first physical layer block” in the instant application);
circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 determining the incoming bit stream/packet corresponds to the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY” in the instant application);
circuitry to update the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY (paragraph [0048] lines 7-18; Examiner’s Notes: the multiplexer 320 multiplexing/updating the multimode demodulator 300 to operate using the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, based on determining that the incoming bit stream/packet corresponds to the Bluetooth 2.0, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to update the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 4, de Ruijter et al. further teach the device, wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY comprises circuitry to deliver the incoming packet from the first physical layer block, based at least in part on detecting the incoming packet (paragraph [0048] lines 7-18; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 outputting/delivering, to the multiplexer 320, from the PHY mode, based on detecting the incoming bit stream/packet, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY comprises circuitry to deliver the incoming packet from the first physical layer block, based at least in part on detecting the incoming packet” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 5, de Ruijter et al. further teach the device, wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY further comprises circuitry to receive the incoming packet with the first receiver (paragraph [0048] lines 1-7; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 receiving the incoming stream/packet regards to the Bluetooth 2.0, as illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY further comprises circuitry to receive the incoming packet with the first receiver” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 14, de Ruijter et al. teach the device, further comprising circuitry to operate all of the physical layer blocks in parallel (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: the demodulators, e.g., Demod1 and Demod2 in parallel, operating PHY modes, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to operate all of the physical layer blocks in parallel” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 15, de Ruijter et al. further teach the device, wherein the device is a system on a chip (SoC) (paragraph [0042] lines 1-20; Examiner’s Notes: the chip regards to the multimode demodulator 200, as depicted in FIG. 1, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the device is a system on a chip (SoC)” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 16, de Ruijter et al. further teach the device, wherein the device is a Bluetooth user device (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: the Bluetooth device in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the device is a Bluetooth user device” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 20, de Ruijter et al. teach the method, comprising:
enabling a plurality of physical layer blocks (paragraphs [0002] lines 1-5 & [0003] lines 1-9; Examiner’s Notes: the PHY modes in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of physical layer blocks” in the instant application),
the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY) (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: an optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration (PHY);”
in fact, the multiple PHY modes including a PHY mode implementing the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the plurality of physical layer blocks comprising a first physical layer block implementing a first Bluetooth physical layer configuration” in the instant application);
enabling a plurality of receivers (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: the demodulators, e.g., Demod1 and Demod2 depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of receivers” in the instant application),
the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block (paragraph [0048] lines 1-7; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 illustrated in FIG. 3 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a first receiver;”
in fact, Demod1 in communication with the PHY mode regards to the Bluetooth 2.0, as illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the plurality of receivers comprising a first receiver in communication with the first physical layer block” in the instant application),
detecting an incoming packet with the first physical layer block (paragraph [0048] lines 1-7; Examiner’s Notes: Preamble detector 1 detecting an incoming bit stream/packet with the PHY mode regards to the Bluetooth 2.0, as illustrated in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to detect an incoming packet with the first physical layer block” in the instant application);
determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: Demod1 determining the incoming bit stream/packet corresponds to the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY” in the instant application); and
updating the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY (paragraph [0048] lines 7-18; Examiner’s Notes: the multiplexer 320 multiplexing/updating the multimode demodulator 300 to operate using the optimal Bluetooth PHY protocol, e.g., for Bluetooth 2.0, based on determining that the incoming bit stream/packet corresponds to the Bluetooth 2.0, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “updating the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY, based at least in part on determining that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Ruijter et al. (US 2018/0048499).
Regarding claim 8, de Ruijter et al. teach the device, wherein the plurality of physical layer blocks comprises: Blutooth 2.0, Blutooth 3.0 and BLE (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10). De Ruijter et al. teach the claimed invention except for particularly implementing a Bluetooth LE 1M PHY, a Bluetooth LE 2M PHY, and a Bluetooth LE Coded PHY.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to implementing a Bluetooth LE 1M PHY, a Bluetooth LE 2M PHY, and a Bluetooth LE Coded PHY, based on the implementation of Blutooth 2.0, Blutooth 3.0 and BLE, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the design. A design choice is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 18, de Ruijter et al. teach the device, wherein the Bluetooth physical layer block implementing BLE (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Note: the data rate in BLE can vary depending on the Bluetooth version and mode used, for example, Bluetooth 5.0 supports data rate of 2Mbps). De Ruijter et al. teach the claimed invention except for particularly implementing a Bluetooth LE high data rate PHY.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to implementing a Bluetooth high data rate PHY, based on the implementation of BLE, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the design. A design choice is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
13. Claims 6, 7, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Ruijter et al. (US 2018/0048499) in view of Desai et al. (US 2021/0120496).
Regarding claim 6, de Ruijter et al. teach the device without explicitly teaching providing notice to media access control (MAC) logic that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY.
Desai et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, providing notice to media access control (MAC) logic that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY (paragraph [0017] lines 1-17; Examiner’s Notes: the MAC circuitry providing signal/notice that the incoming packet/information corresponds to the Bluetooth PHY in the prior art teaches the limitation of “providing notice to media access control (MAC) logic that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY” in the instant application),
wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY comprises circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY based at least in part on the notice (paragraph [0017] lines 17-30; Examiner’s Notes: determining that the incoming information/packet corresponds to the Bluetooth PHY based on the MAC signal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY comprises circuitry to determine that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY based at least in part on the notice” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Desai et al. in the system of de Ruijter et al.
The motivation for providing notice to media access control (MAC) logic that the incoming packet corresponds to the first Bluetooth PHY, is to further enhance the mechanism for an apparatus of a wireless communication device, wherein the apparatus includes control circuitry to cause receiver circuitry of the wireless communication device to switch between an on-mode and an off-mode, the apparatus also includes synchronizing circuitry to perform a correlation on signals of a packet received by the receiver circuitry when in the on-mode to detect a pattern in the received signals, and cause the control circuitry to hold the receiver circuitry in the on-mode based on detection of the pattern in the received signals, and the apparatus further includes demodulation circuitry to process additional signals of the packet received by the receiver circuitry when held in the on-mode.
Regarding claim 7, Desai et al. further teach the device, wherein the circuitry to provide notice to the MAC logic comprises circuitry to deliver at least a portion of the packet to the MAC logic (paragraph [0017] lines 1-17; Examiner’s Notes: the MAC circuitry providing/delivering signal/packet in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the circuitry to provide notice to the MAC logic comprises circuitry to deliver at least a portion of the packet to the MAC logic” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 9, de Ruijter et al. teach the device without explicitly teaching implementing packet identifier.
Desai et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein: the incoming packet comprises a packet identifier and detecting the incoming packet comprises detecting the packet identifier (paragraph [0057] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: the packet header in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a packet identifier;”
detecting the packet header of the incoming packet in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein: the incoming packet comprises a packet identifier and detecting the incoming packet comprises detecting the packet identifier” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Desai et al. in the system of de Ruijter et al.
The motivation for implementing packet identifier, is to further enhance the mechanism for an apparatus of a wireless communication device, wherein the apparatus includes control circuitry to cause receiver circuitry of the wireless communication device to switch between an on-mode and an off-mode, the apparatus also includes synchronizing circuitry to perform a correlation on signals of a packet received by the receiver circuitry when in the on-mode to detect a pattern in the received signals, and cause the control circuitry to hold the receiver circuitry in the on-mode based on detection of the pattern in the received signals, and the apparatus further includes demodulation circuitry to process additional signals of the packet received by the receiver circuitry when held in the on-mode.
Regarding claim 10, de Ruijter et al. further teach the device, wherein the physical layer block implementing the Bluetooth LE 1M PHY and the physical layer block implementing the Bluetooth LE 2M PHY are combined into a single Bluetooth physical layer block (paragraph [0048] lines 1-18; Examiner’s Notes: the PHY mode 1 through Demod1 and the PHY mode 1 through Demod2 are multiplexed through multiplexer 320, to an output/a single Bluetooth PHY, as depicted in FIG. 3, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the physical layer block implementing the Bluetooth LE 1M PHY and the physical layer block implementing the Bluetooth LE 2M PHY are combined into a single Bluetooth physical layer block” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 11, de Ruijter et al. teach the device, further comprising circuitry to operate at least a portion of the single Bluetooth physical layer block at a Bluetooth LE 2M rate (paragraph [0004] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Note: the data rate in BLE can vary depending on the Bluetooth version and mode used, for example, Bluetooth 5.0 supports data rate of 2Mbps; consequently, the BLE in the prior art teaches the limitation of “circuitry to operate at least a portion of the single Bluetooth physical layer block at a Bluetooth LE 2M rate” in the instant application).
Allowable Subject Matter
14. Claims 12, 13, 17, and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 3, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claim(s).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, the prior art in single or in combination fails to teach "comprising circuitry to expand the packet identifier if the packet is a Bluetooth LE 1M packet” in combination with other limitation of the claim(s).
Regarding claim 17, the prior art in single or in combination fails to teach "wherein the incoming packet is a Bluetooth LE 2M packet comprising an advertising PDU, the device further comprising circuitry to receive the incoming packet on a Bluetooth primary advertising channel” in combination with other limitation of the claim(s).
Regarding claim 19, the prior art in single or in combination fails to teach "wherein the circuitry to update the device to operate using the first Bluetooth PHY comprises: circuitry to enable the first receiver and disable all other receivers; circuitry to receive one or more subsequent incoming Bluetooth packets with the first receiver; circuitry to transmit one or more outgoing Bluetooth packets using the first Bluetooth PHY” in combination with other limitation of the claim(s).
Conclusion
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kumar et al. (US 2024/0129699) is cited to show a method for providing improvements of short-range wireless communications, such as Bluetooth LE Audio communication, wherein an audio source device determines that unidirectional audio is to be output, in response to determining that unidirectional audio is to be output, a first physical layer (PHY) configuration can be set for a first communication link in the downlink direction from the audio source device to the audio output device, a second PHY configuration can be set for the communication link in the uplink direction from the audio output device to the audio source device, and the first PHY configuration has a greater symbol rate than the second PHY configuration;
Cao et al. (US 2025/0038831) is cited to show a short-distance wireless communication method, including a sending device that sends first clock information to a relay device, where the first clock information indicates a local clock of the sending device, and communication between the sending device and a receiving device is performed based on at least the first clock information, the sending device sends first service data to the receiving device via the relay device, in this manner, the relay device can relay and amplify BLUETOOTH information to increase a transmission distance, and ensure that a frequency hopping sequence, physical layer modulation and bandwidth, and an encryption mode remain unchanged before and after a host is transferred, to ensure a service to be continuously performed and avoid freezing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is 571-270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473