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 .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/2/2024, 8/18/2025, 10/10/2025, and 4/2/2026 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 7 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim(s) 1, line 5+, “a Rydberg sensor”, was recited perhaps - - [[a]]the Rydberg sensor - - was meant.
In claim(s) 1, line 4+, “a passive antenna”, was recited perhaps - - [[a]]the passive antenna - - was meant.
In claim(s) 7, line 3+, “a Rydberg sensor”, was recited perhaps - - [[a]]the Rydberg sensor - - was meant.
In claim(s) 7, line 3+, “a passive antenna”, was recited perhaps - - [[a]]the passive antenna - - was meant.
In claim(s) 7, line 6+, “the base station”, was recited perhaps - - [[the]]a base station- - was meant.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 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:
With regards to claims 1: “computer-readable media” The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent See MPEP 2111.01.
As currently claimed, the language a computer readable medium does not specify if the computer readable medium is “transitory” or “non-transitory” and therefore claims 1-6 are considered to be non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 (See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2).
The following language is suggested for claim 1:
“A non-transitory computer-readable media”
The following language is suggested for claims 2-6:
“The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim …”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 7-8, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anderson (US 20220196716 A1)
With regards to claim 7. Anderson disclose(s):
A method of utilizing a Rydberg sensor in a passive antenna radio system (fig 7), the method comprising:
replacing receiver portions of a passive antenna with a Rydberg sensor (see 100 [0293]; see atomic receiver being a Rydberg in [0249]);
receiving radio frequency RF carrier signals at the Rydberg sensor [0292]; and
providing a modulated signal corresponding to the RF carrier signals from the Rydberg sensor to the base station via an optical fiber (730; [0295]).
With regards to claim 8. Anderson disclose(s):
The method of claim 7, further comprising reducing base band capacity at the base station (see control of baseband in [0186]; see [0239]).
With regards to claim 11. Anderson disclose(s):
The method of claim 7, further comprising extracting, by the Rydberg sensor, an in-phase component and a quadrature-phase component (IQ) of the modulated signal [0205, 0261].
With regards to claim 12. Anderson disclose(s):
The method of claim 7, further comprising selecting a wavelength of a laser in the Rydberg sensor to correspond to an RF operating frequency [0210].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-10 is/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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claim(s) 9: the prior art fails to disclose a/an method of utilizing a Rydberg sensor in a passive antenna radio system requiring:
removing duplexers and filters for dedicated transmitter and receiver paths in the passive antenna radio system, in combination with other limitations of the claim.
With regards to claim(s) 10: the prior art fails to disclose a/an method of utilizing a Rydberg sensor in a passive antenna radio system requiring:
adjusting an orientation of the Rydberg sensor to correspond to a polarization of an arriving electromagnetic (EM) field, in combination with other limitations of the claim.
Claim(s) 13-20 is/are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With regards to claim(s) 13: the prior art fails to disclose a/an Rydberg sensor passive antenna array system requiring:
the RRU comprising one or more power amplifiers, and a radio frequency (RF) control component configured to transmit an outgoing RF signal from a base station via the one or more transmitting elements of the passive antenna, wherein the one or more Rydberg sensors are configured to receive an incoming RF signal, in combination with other limitations of the claim.
With regards to dependent claim(s) 14-20; it/they are allowable in virtue of their dependency.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pecen (US 11402479 B1) discloses: a photonic crystal masers configured to emit directional RF electromagnetic radiation, for example, a beam of RF electromagnetic radiation. Such masers can be used in the stations of a point-to-point communication system. The photonic crystal masers may operate using Rydberg atom-based sensing technology. Rydberg atom-based sensing technology uses quantum interference of internal energy states, including Rydberg states, of an atom to detect electromagnetic radiation [lines 45-55 in col 4].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENAN LUQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1044. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. 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.
/RENAN LUQUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844
Prosecution Insights