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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para [0161] has DUT labeled as 12, but figures label it 14, other areas of spec label it 14 as well.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from 6AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohindra (US-20250067782-A1) in view of Lee (US-20190348760-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Mohindra teaches a method of determining a quality metric for a device under test the method comprising:
receiving a transmission signal (Fig 1: x(t)) by a corresponding reception branch (Fig 1 in its entirety) having at least a first receiver and a second receiver (Fig 1: first and second channels, 110 & 120), wherein the first receiver and the second receiver both receive and process the same transmission signal (Fig 1: x(t)), thereby providing a first complex-valued measurement signal and a second complex-valued measurement signal respectively (Para [0041] teaches that complex equalization is performed on the first and second RF signals, this indicates a complex-value signal may be used),
providing at least one reference signal that is associated with a signal to be transmitted by the device under test (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM must be time and phase aligned with a reference/ideal waveform, Para [0041] also teaches the ideal signal is associated with the DUT),
calculating a first quality vector for the first receiver based on the first complex-valued measurement signal and a second quality vector for the second receiver based on the second complex-valued measurement signal (Para [0041] teaches the MD module, 132 & 134, calculate the first and second modulation distortion error vector magnitude (MDEVM) respectively), wherein the quality vectors are calculated with respect to the at least one reference signal (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM must be time and phase aligned with a reference/ideal waveform, Para [0041] also teaches the ideal signal is associated with the DUT),
determining a combined average of the first quality vector and of a complex conjugate of the second quality vector over a predetermined number of samples, thereby obtaining a complex-valued average signal Para [0042]-[0044] the averaging of the first and second MDEVMs, which involves the first MD error vector and the conjugate of the second MD error vector. This is done over 'N' number of coherent averages), and
determining a quality metric based on the complex-valued average signal (Para [0044] teaches obtaining an aggregate cross-correlated MDEVM).
Mohindra does not teach receiving each of the multiple transmission signals by a respective reception antenna connected to a corresponding reception branch. However, Lee teaches receiving each of the multiple transmission signals by a respective reception antenna (Fig 1: antennas, L11-Lmn & R11-Rmn) connected to a corresponding reception branch (Fig 1: partial scanning arrays, 110 & 120, along with their respective transceivers, 141 & 142). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Mohindra to incorporate the multiple signal paths of Lee. A motivation for this modification is to have a means to compare signals in one branch to signals in another branch, as taught by Lee in Para [0022].
Regarding Claim 2, Mohindra further teaches wherein each complex-valued measurement signal comprises a symbol sequence associated with the respective transmission signal, and wherein the symbol sequences received are processed in order to calculate the quality vectors (Para [0041-0044] teaches symbols for each of the first and second RF signals which are then used to calculate the error vectors).
Regarding Claim 3, Mohindra further teaches wherein the at least one reference signal is inputted to a detector circuit that calculates the respective quality vectors based on the reference signal inputted and the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0041] teaches the error vectors are calculated and compared with the reference signal, therefore there must be an input that allows the noiseless reference signal to be compared).
Regarding Claim 4, Mohindra further teaches wherein the at least one reference signal is determined by a detector circuit from processing the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0044] teaches the output of the cross-correlation module, 135, is the uncorrelated error corrected EVM of the RF signal output by the DUT, which is the reference signal), and wherein the respective quality vectors are calculated based on the reference signal determined and the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0041] teaches the error vectors are calculated and compared with the reference signal).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee, as presented with respect to claim 1, teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to determine the quality metric for each of the multiple transmission antennas individually (Mohindra teaches the detector circuit that can determine the quality metric for a signal, as demonstrated in the claim 1 rejection, the combination would therefore teach it for an individual antenna). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee, as presented with respect to claim 1, teaches wherein the quality metric is determined for all of the multiple transmission antennas commonly (It is noted the examiner is giving the term “commonly” its broadest reasonable interpretation, which will be taken to mean “in a similar way.” Therefore, the examiner is interpreting this claim such that if a reference or combination or references teaches the limitation for the multiple interpretations in a similar way then it will read on the claim. -- Mohindra teaches the detector circuit that can determine the quality metric for a signal, as demonstrated in the claim 1 rejection, the combination would therefore teach it for all the individual antennas in a similar way as each circuit performs the same actions). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 9, Mohindra further teaches wherein the quality vectors are averaged in time and/or frequency (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM can be calculated in time or frequency).
Regarding Claim 10, Mohindra further teaches wherein the quality vectors are error vectors and the quality metric is an error vector magnitude (Para [0041]).
Regarding Claim 11, Mohindra teaches a method of determining a quality metric for a device under test the method comprising:
receiving a transmission signal (Fig 1: x(t)) by a corresponding reception branch (Fig 1 in its entirety) having at least a first receiver and a second receiver (Fig 1: first and second channels, 110 & 120), wherein the first receiver and the second receiver both receive and process the same transmission signal (Fig 1: x(t)), thereby providing a first complex-valued measurement signal and a second complex-valued measurement signal respectively (Para [0041] teaches that complex equalization is performed on the first and second RF signals, this indicates a complex-value signal may be used),
providing at least one reference signal that is associated with a signal to be transmitted by the device under test (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM must be time and phase aligned with a reference/ideal waveform, Para [0041] also teaches the ideal signal is associated with the DUT),
calculating a first quality vector for the first receiver based on the first complex-valued measurement signal and a second quality vector for the second receiver based on the second complex-valued measurement signal (Para [0041] teaches the MD module, 132 & 134, calculate the first and second modulation distortion error vector magnitude (MDEVM) respectively), wherein the quality vectors are calculated with respect to the at least one reference signal (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM must be time and phase aligned with a reference/ideal waveform, Para [0041] also teaches the ideal signal is associated with the DUT),
cross-correlating the first quality vector and the second quality vector, thereby obtaining a cross-correlated signal (Para [0043] teaches the cross-correlation of the error vectors), and
determining a quality metric based on the cross-correlated signal (Para [0044] teaches obtaining an aggregate cross-correlated MDEVM).
Mohindra does not teach receiving each of the multiple transmission signals by a respective reception antenna connected to a corresponding reception branch. However, Lee teaches receiving each of the multiple transmission signals by a respective reception antenna (Fig 1: antennas, L11-Lmn & R11-Rmn) connected to a corresponding reception branch (Fig 1: partial scanning arrays, 110 & 120, along with their respective transceivers, 141 & 142). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Mohindra to incorporate the multiple signal paths of Lee. A motivation for this modification is to have a means to compare signals in one branch to signals in another branch, as taught by Lee in Para [0022].
Regarding Claim 12, Mohindra teaches a measurement system for determining a quality metric for a device under test,
wherein the measurement system comprises at least one detector circuit (Fig 1: processing unit, 130), wherein the at least one detector circuit has a first signal input (Fig 1: x1(t)), a second signal input (Fig 1: x2(t)), and an averaging sub-circuit (Fig 1: cross-correlation module, 135), wherein each reception branch is configured to receive one of the multiple transmission signals (Fig 1: x(t)), wherein each reception branch comprises at least two receivers such that the at least two receivers of the same reception branch receive and process the same transmission signal (Fig 1: first and second channels, 110 & 120), thereby providing a first complex-valued measurement signal and a second complex-valued measurement signal respectively (Para [0041] teaches that complex equalization is performed on the first and second RF signals, this indicates a complex-value signal may be used),
wherein the first signal input is connected with the first receiver and configured to receive the first complex-valued measurement signal (can be seen in Fig 1),
wherein the second signal input is associated with the second receiver and configured to receive the second complex-valued measurement signal (can be seen in Fig 1),
wherein the detector circuit is configured to calculate a first quality vector for the first receiver based on the first complex-valued measurement signal and a second quality vector for the second receiver based on the second complex-valued measurement signal (Para [0041] teaches the MD module, 132 & 134, calculate the first and second modulation distortion error vector magnitude (MDEVM) respectively),
wherein the quality vectors are calculated with respect to a reference signal provided which is associated with a signal to be transmitted by the device under test (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM must be time and phase aligned with a reference/ideal waveform, Para [0041] also teaches the ideal signal is associated with the DUT),
wherein the averaging sub-circuit is configured to determine a combined average of the first quality vector and of a complex conjugate of the second quality vector over a predetermined number of samples, thereby obtaining a complex-valued average signal (Para [0042]-[0044] the averaging of the first and second MDEVMs, which involves the first MD error vector and the conjugate of the second MD error vector. This is done over 'N' number of coherent averages), and
wherein the averaging sub-circuit is configured to determine a quality metric based on the complex-valued average signal (Para [0044] teaches obtaining an aggregate cross-correlated MDEVM).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee teaches wherein the measurement system comprises a measurement instrument (Lee - Fig 1: combination of 105, 141, 142 | refer to annotated Fig 1 of Lee) that comprises the multiple reception branches (Lee - Fig 1: partial scanning arrays, 110 & 120, along with their respective transceivers, 141 & 142) and the at least one detector circuit (Mohindra - Fig 1: processing unit, 130),
wherein each of the reception branches is connected to a respective reception antenna (Lee - Fig 1: antennas, L11-Lmn & R11-Rmn),
wherein each of the reception branches has at least two parallel measurement channels having the respective receiver (Mohindra - Fig 1: first and second channels, 110 & 120), and
wherein the measurement system further comprises a separately formed device under test with the multiple transmission antennas (Lee - Fig 1: DUT, 180, with integrated antenna array, 185) via which the multiple transmission signals are transmitted over-the-air, which are received by the multiple reception antennas of the measurement instrument (Lee - Para [0026] teaches that the scanning array, 105, which consists of multiple antennas, receives radio frequency signals from the DUT).
Regarding Claim 16, Mohindra further teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to average the quality vectors in time and/or frequency (Para [0041] teaches the MDEVM can be calculated in time or frequency).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee, as presented with respect to claim 12, teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to determine the quality metric for each of the multiple transmission antennas individually (Mohindra teaches the detector circuit that can determine the quality metric for a signal, as demonstrated in the claim 1 rejection, the combination would therefore teach it for an individual antenna). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee, as presented with respect to claim 12, teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to determine the quality metric for all of the multiple transmission antennas commonly (It is noted the examiner is giving the term “commonly” its broadest reasonable interpretation, which will be taken to mean “in a similar way.” Therefore, the examiner is interpreting this claim such that if a reference or combination or references teaches the limitation for the multiple interpretations in a similar way then it will read on the claim. -- Mohindra teaches the detector circuit that can determine the quality metric for a signal, as demonstrated in the claim 1 rejection, the combination would therefore teach it for all the individual antennas in a similar way as each circuit performs the same actions). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 19, Mohindra further teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit has an input configured to receive the at least one reference signal, and
wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to calculate the respective quality vectors based on the reference signal inputted and the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0041] teaches the error vectors are calculated and compared with the reference signal, therefore there must be an input that allows the noiseless reference signal to be compared).
Regarding Claim 20, Mohindra further teaches wherein the at least one detector circuit is configured to determine the at least one reference signal from processing the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0044] teaches the output of the cross-correlation module, 135, is the uncorrelated error corrected EVM of the RF signal output by the DUT, which is the reference signal), and
wherein at least one detector circuit is configured to calculate the respective quality vectors based on the reference signal determined and the complex-valued measurement signals (Para [0041] teaches the error vectors are calculated and compared with the reference signal).
PNG
media_image1.png
1222
859
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of Lee
Claims 5-6, and 14-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mohindra in view of Lee in view of Hum et al. (US20080130775-A1).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee does not teach wherein the complex-valued measurement signals are processed in a constellation layer in order to determine constellation points for the complex-valued measurement signals. However, Hum teaches wherein the complex-valued measurement signals are processed in a constellation layer in order to determine constellation points for the complex-valued measurement signals (Hum teaches, in Para [0055] with reference to Fig 5, that the demapping process uses a constellation diagram for the symbols). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination to include a constellation layer as taught in Hum. A motivation for this modification is constellation layers can show a comparison of a received signal to an ideal signal and use that to assess a signal’s quality, as is known in the art.
Regarding Claim 6, while Mohindra in view of Lee does teach cross-correlating the error vectors over symbols (Mohindra - Para [0042-0043], it does not explicitly state the process is done through demapping. However, Hum teaches in Para [0046] a demapping function to process each bit of each symbol). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination, to include demapping as taught in Hum. A motivation for this modification is the demapping taught by Hum allows the association of the symbols with the corresponding antenna layer (Para [0045]).
Regarding Claim 14, while Mohindra in view of Lee does teach cross-correlating the error vectors over symbols (Mohindra - Para [0042-0043], it does not explicitly state the process is done through demapping. However, Hum teaches in Para [0046] a demapping function to process each bit of each symbol). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of the combination, to include demapping as taught in Hum. A motivation for this modification is the demapping taught by Hum allows the association of the symbols with the corresponding antenna layer (Para [0045]).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Mohindra in view of Lee in view of Hum as presented with respect to claim 14, teaches wherein the measurement instrument is configured to process the symbol streams obtained in a constellation diagram layer (Hum teaches, in Para [0055] with reference to Fig 5, that the demapping process uses a constellation diagram for the symbols). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH J BARRON whose telephone number is (571)272-0902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 09:30-17:30 ET.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/JEREMIAH J BARRON/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858