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 .
Claims 1 to 12 are presented for examination. Acknowledgement is made of the preliminary amendment filed 5-16-2024 cancelling claims 7 to 9. The claims 1 to 12 filed on 11-11-2024 does not comply with the claim set filed 5-16-2024 cancelling claims 7 to 9. The claims being examined are (1 to 6 and 10 to 12) the set filed 5-16-2024 cancelling claims 7 to 9.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references listed in the information disclosure statement submitted on 7-17-2024 have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 to 6 and 10 to 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims (1, 4 and 10) recite the limitation of” generating a first encoded bit sequence from an information bit sequence based on a polar code and generating a second encoded bit sequence by puncturing the first encoded bit sequence based on a code rate”. These limitations as drafted, are a process that under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a mathematical relationship of the mathematical concept grouping. The terns of the claims are presumed to have their plain meaning consistent with the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. Thus, the limitation of generating a first encoded bit sequence and generating a second encoding bit sequence are mathematical operations and the preamble of a method of transmitting a signal by a transmitting device in a communication system, does not further modify the limitations of generating encoded bit sequences recited in the body of the claim. The preamble of the claims fails to add any meaningful limits to the abstract idea. The additional limitation of “transmitting the second encoded bit sequence” is a generic component for completing the abstract idea and fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitation of transmitting the encoded sequence is generic tool for use by the abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitation is generic component and fails to add significantly more than the abstract idea. The additional limitation fails to improve a computer or technology therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea and are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2 to 3, 5 to 6, 11 and 12 are abstract idea and is an extension of the puncturing pattern of the independent claims thus falling withing the mathematical relationship of the mathematical concept grouping. The dependent claims fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application rather they are mere extensions of the puncturing pattern providing instructions for the abstract idea of the independent claims. The dependent claims do not add any meaningful limits to the abstract idea and fails to add significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 10 to 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because computer-readable medium (CRM), under the broadest reasonable interpretation will cover an ineligible signal per se unless defined otherwise in the specification. The specification recites a computer-readable (non-volatile) storage medium storing a computer program product; however, the specification is silent on a signal per se. Therefore, the claims are drawn to a form of energy. Energy is not one of the four categories of invention and these claims are not statutory. Energy is not a series of steps or acts and thus is not a process. Energy is not a physical article or object and as such is not a machine or manufacture. Energy is not a combination of substances and therefore not a composition of matter.
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, 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 to 6 and 10 to 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GE (USPAP 2018/0183464).
Claims 1 and 10:
GE substantially teaches the claimed invention. GE teaches an apparatus and a method for polar code construction comprising: polar encodes that are based on a 2-by-2 kernel of Kronecker products. Ge also teaches that a channel is divided not N sub-channels wherein information block and frozen bits are allocated onto the N sub-channels and the resultant N-sized vector is multiplied with an N-by-N Kronecker matrix (see par. 0059). GE teaches that code construction involves determining a code rate and selecting the particular K sub-channels among the N available sub-channels that care to carry information bits (see par. 0063).
GE teaches encoding a Kronecker matrix comprises a first sub-channel being distributed on all the coded bits and the last sub-channel is distributed only on the last bit (see par. 0078).
GE teaches that puncturing could be used to provide for different code rates and code lengths for the polar codes. GE also teaches that a puncturing process is performed on the encoded information block (see par. 0079).
GE fails to specifically teach a puncturing pattern comprising a number of punctured bits of (122 bits) that satisfied a nested property; however, this teaching is obvious to the teachings of GE since GE teaches that a method and an apparatus for codes construction of polar codes comprises designing puncturing schemes for polar codes taking into account sensitivity, characteristic and relevance between punctured bits and sub-channels (see par. 0078) and the sequence (Qmax) has a nested property for a 2-by-2 kernel (see par. 0106). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polar code construction of GE to include the claimed puncturing pattern that satisfies a nested property because GE teaches that puncturing patters are designed and the 2-by-2 kernel operates with a nested property. This modification would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ a method and an apparatus for building a generator matrix or a large kernel of a Kronecker product by building nested property for polarization as taught by GE (see par. 0107). As to the further limitations of the claim, GE teaches an apparatus for encoding and transmitting codewords (see par. 0139). GE teaches that the encoded bit sequence is transmitted over a wireless channel and the transmitter includes components of a radio frequency (RF) transmit chain (see par. 0140).
As per claims 2 to 3 and 11 to 12, GE fails to teach the claimed puncturing patterns; however, this teaching is obvious to the teachings of GE because GE teaches when puncturing polar codes, a puncturing pattern is designed based on account sensitivity, characteristic and relevance between punctured bits and sub-channels (see par. 0078). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polar code construction of GE to include the claimed puncturing pattern because GE teaches that puncturing patters are designed to achieved desired coding of polar codes. This modification would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ a method and an apparatus for constructing a coding sequence of polar codes that uses a puncturing scheme to generate multiple coding rates and achieving reliability as taught by GE (see par. 0060).
Claim 4:
GE substantially teaches the claimed invention. GE teaches an apparatus for encoding and transmitting codewords comprises an encoding module coupled to a memory (1812) and a code processing module (1810) (see fig. 18 and par. 0168). GE teaches that the transmitting module could include a radio frequency unit (see par. 00168). GE teaches that the memory is a non-transitory computer readable medium that include instructions for execution by a processor to implement and/or control operations of the code-processing module (see par. 0169).
. GE teaches an apparatus and a method for polar code construction comprising: polar encodes that are based on a 2-by-2 kernel of Kronecker products. Ge also teaches that a channel is divided not N sub-channels wherein information block and frozen bits are allocated onto the N sub-channels and the resultant N-sized vector is multiplied with an N-by-N Kronecker matrix (see par. 0059). GE teaches that code construction involves determining a code rate and selecting the particular K sub-channels among the N available sub-channels that care to carry information bits (see par. 0063).
GE teaches encoding a Kronecker matrix comprises a first sub-channel being distributed on all the coded bits and the last sub-channel is distributed only on the last bit (see par. 0078).
GE teaches that puncturing could be used to provide for different code rates and code lengths for the polar codes. GE also teaches that a puncturing process is performed on the encoded information block (see par. 0079).
GE fails to specifically teach a puncturing pattern comprising a number of punctured bits of (122 bits) that satisfied a nested property; however, this teaching is obvious to the teachings of GE since GE teaches that a method and an apparatus for codes construction of polar codes comprises designing puncturing schemes for polar codes taking into account sensitivity, characteristic and relevance between punctured bits and sub-channels (see par. 0078) and the sequence (Qmax) has a nested property for a 2-by-2 kernel (see par. 0106). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polar code construction of GE to include the claimed puncturing pattern that satisfies a nested property because GE teaches that puncturing patters are designed and the 2-by-2 kernel operates with a nested property. This modification would have been obvious because a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ a method and an apparatus for building a generator matrix or a large kernel of a Kronecker product by building nested property for polarization as taught by GE (see par. 0107). As to the further limitations of the claim, GE teaches an apparatus for encoding and transmitting codewords (see par. 0139). GE teaches that the encoded bit sequence is transmitted over a wireless channel and the transmitter includes components of a radio frequency (RF) transmit chain (see par. 0140).
As per claims 5 and 6, they are similar to claims 2 and 3 and are rejected for the same rationale applied to claims 2 and 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hui et al. (USPAP 2021/0273662 A1) discloses a system and a method for puncturing polar encoded bits.
Wei et al. (USPAP 2019/0372608 A1) discloses a puncturing method for low-rate polar codes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLY A CHASE whose telephone number is (571)272-3816. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:00-5:30, 2nd Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Albert Decady can be reached at 571-272 3819. 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.
/Shelly A Chase/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112