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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/23/2025 has been considered by Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Menkhoff et al. (U.S PAT. 11,863,225, hereinafter “Menkhoff”) in view of Sienko et al. (U.S PAT. 11,502,717, hereinafter “Sienko”).
Consider claim 1, Menkhoff teaches an in-phase/quadrature-phase (IQ) interface switching method, comprising: determining, by a transceiver of an apparatus, at least one condition to generate a detection result (col.8, lines 35-67).
Menkhoff does not explicitly show that dynamically determining, by the transceiver, to use at least one analog IQ (AIQ) interface and/or at least one digital IQ (DIQ) interface based on the detection result to transmit IQ data between a radio frequency (RF) signal processing device of the transceiver and a baseband (BB) signal processing device of the transceiver.
In the same field of endeavor, Sienko teaches dynamically determining, by the transceiver, to use at least one analog IQ (AIQ) interface and/or at least one digital IQ (DIQ) interface based on the detection result to transmit IQ data between a radio frequency (RF) signal processing device of the transceiver and a baseband (BB) signal processing device of the transceiver (col. 7 line 46 through col. 8, line 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use, dynamically determining, by the transceiver, to use at least one analog IQ (AIQ) interface and/or at least one digital IQ (DIQ) interface based on the detection result to transmit IQ data between a radio frequency (RF) signal processing device of the transceiver and a baseband (BB) signal processing device of the transceiver, as taught by Sienko, in order for mixing an input signal that includes: a digital source configured to generate a digital local oscillator signal; and a plurality of switching mixers, each switching mixer configured to mix a respective bit from the digital local oscillator signal with the input signal.
Consider claim 2, Menkhoff further teaches wherein the IQ data is associated with a radio access technology (RAT) or a frequency range (FR) of a RAT (col. 4, line 66 through col. 5, line 25).
Consider claim 3, Menkhoff further teaches wherein the RAT or the frequency range of a RAT comprises a 4G, a 5G frequency range 1 (FR1), a 5G frequency range 2 (FR2), or one of 6G frequency ranges (col. 5, line 60 through col. 6, line 22).
Consider claim 4, Menkhoff further teaches wherein the at least one condition comprises the number of antennas for the IQ data, the number of component carriers (CCs) for the IQ data, and/or a bandwidth (BW) (col. 15, lines 34-46).
Consider claim 5, Menkhoff further teaches wherein the transceiver determines to use only the AIQ interface to transmit the IQ data in response to the number of antennas and the number of CCs for the IQ data being not greater than a threshold; and the transceiver determines to use the DIQ interface or both of the AIQ interface and the DIQ interface to transmit the IQ data in response to the number of antennas and the number of CCs for the IQ data being greater than the threshold (col. 11, lines 40-57).
Consider claim 6, Sienko further teaches wherein each AIQ interface comprises two or four wires and each AIQ interface is used for one antenna and one CC (col. 10, lines 16-47).
Consider claim 7, Menkhoff further teaches wherein each DIQ interface comprises a lane, an IQ data combining circuit and an IQ data dispatch circuit, and each DIQ interface is used for one or more antennas and one or more CCs (col. 11, lines 40-57).
Consider claim 8, the subject-matter of independent claim 8 relates to an apparatus for in-phase/quadrature-phase (IQ) interface switching, with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 8.
Consider claim 9, the previous rejections of claim 2 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 9.
Consider claim 10, the previous rejections of claim 3 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 10.
Consider claim 11, the previous rejections of claim 4 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 11.
Consider claim 12, the previous rejections of claim 5 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 12.
Consider claim 13, the previous rejections of claim 6 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 13.
Consider claim 14, the previous rejections of claim 7 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 14.
Consider claim 15, the subject-matter of independent claim 15 relates to a transceiver for in-phase/quadrature-phase (IQ) interface switching with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 15.
Consider claim 16, the previous rejections of claim 2 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 16.
Consider claim 17, the previous rejections of claim 3 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 17.
Consider claim 18, the previous rejections of claim 4 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 18.
Consider claim 19, the previous rejections of claim 5 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 19.
Consider claim 20, the previous rejections of claims 6-7 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 20.
Conclusion
4. Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop_________ (Explanation, e.g., Amendment or After-final, etc.)
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Facsimile responses should be faxed to:
(571) 273-8300
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-8329. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00Am - 5:00Pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pan Yuwen can be reached on (571) 272-7855. 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).
/TUAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights