CTNF 18/735,639 CTNF 101671 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed on July 29, 2024. Claims 1-29, 59, 92, and 102-122 canceled. Claims 30-58, and 93-101 are pending. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on June 06, 2024, November 14, 2024, December 11, 2024, March 03, 2025, April 14, 2025, July 11, 2025, November 06, 2025, and February 05, 2026 have been considered by examiner. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 37 and 56 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response.” is unclear because the nature of the recited signal representation cannot be readily determined . Appropriate correction is required. Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “preprocessing a third signal with a second preprocessing block to form a second preprocessed signal” recites “a third signal” without clearly introducing the third signal earlier in the claim or defining its relationship to the previously recited signal. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 53 is further objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the another signal” in the limitation “wherein the nonlinear combiner is configured to combine the first signal with the another signal” lacks proper antecedent basis . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. Claims 30-36, 38-52, 54-55, 57-58, 93-96, 98, 100-101 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Megretski et al . (US 10931238 B2, hereinafter “Megretski”). Regarding Claim 30, Megretski teaches, in a radio frequency (RF) transceiver system having a transmit chain, “The linearization system 100 includes a transmitter chain 110 used to perform the transmission processing on signals produced by an actuator (implementing a digital predistorter, or DPD) 120.” [Col. 10, lines 47-50], and a control unit, “In some embodiments, at least some functionality of the linearization system 100 … may be implemented using a controller (e.g., a processor-based controller) included with one or more of the modules of the system 100 (the actuator 120, the estimator (adaptation module) 130, or any of the other modules of the system 100).” [Col. 19, lines 40-50], and “The controller may be operatively coupled to the various modules or units of the system 100, and be configured to generate an efficient envelope tracking signal e, compute predistorted sample values for v and eA (the outputs of the actuator 120 or the actuator 200), update the actuator's coefficients.” [Col. 19, lines 49-54]. FIG. 3 further illustrates a Coefficient Estimator/Interpolator 336 coupled to DPD 310 through DPD coefficients 320, wherein Coefficient Estimator/Interpolator 336 corresponds to the claimed control unit. a digital pre-distorter (DPD) (310, Fig. 3) comprising a plurality of inputs, “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u (e.g., a digital signal with 500 Msps) and also receives the tracked envelope signal e generated based on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 28-30], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 55-59]. a first input to receive a first signal corresponding to a signal desired to be transmitted via the transmit chain or a modified version of said signal, “The method further includes receiving , by the digital predistorter , the input signal u” [Col. 3, lines 1-2], and “the procedure 400 additionally includes receiving 420, by the digital predistorter (e.g., by the receiver section of the digital predistorter device), the input signal u” [Col. 20, lines 63-65], and “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u” [Col. 12, lines 28-29] a second input connected to the control unit to receive a second signal corresponding to a control signal for commanding a system state of the transmit chain or a translated version of the control signal, “the predistortion functions are based not only the input signal that is to be predistorted, but also on the control signal used to modulate the power amplifier (i.e., to control the power provided to operate the power amplifier) to intentionally/deliberately put the power amplifier (and thus the transmit chain) into non-linear operational mode” [Col. 1, lines 59-65], and “Accordingly , in some embodiments , the control signal ( e.g. , an envelope tracking signal , or some signal derived from that envelope tracking signal ) may be used” [Col. 2, lines 12-14], and “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u (e.g., a digital signal with 500 Msps) and also receives the tracked envelope signal e” [Col. 12, lines 28-29], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA.” [Col. 11, lines 65-67] circuitry configured to apply digital predistortion to the signal desired to be transmitted, “Described are various digital predistortion implementations” [Col. 8, lines 55-56], and “actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The linearization system 100 includes a transmitter chain 110 used to perform the transmission processing on signals produced by an actuator (implementing a digital predistorter, or DPD) 120” [Col. 10, lines 47-50] based at least in part on combining the first and second signals, “Described are various digital predistortion implementations that include an envelope generator that can generate a slow or fast envelope signal (depending on available bandwidth), an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain.” [Col. 8, lines 55-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “generating 430, by the digital predistorter (e.g., by a controller circuit of the digital predistorter device), based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 20, lines 65-67] and [Col. 21, lines 1-3] and an output connected to provide a resulting pre-distorted signal, “generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain.” [Col. 8, lines 60-61], and “providing the predistorted signal v to the transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 16-17], and further “ providing 440 (e.g., by an output section of a digital predistorter device) the predistorted signal v to the transmit chain” [Col. 22, lines 22-24] to the transmit chain operating at the system state, “a power amplifier 114 whose operational power (and thus non-linear behavior) is controlled based on an envelope tracking signal e” [Col. 10, lines 28-31], and “the control signal used to modulate the power amplifier (i.e., to control the power provided to operate the power amplifier) to intentionally/deliberately put the power amplifier (and thus the transmit chain) into non-linear operational mode.” [Col. 1, lines 61-65] Regarding Claim 31, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 31 as recited above in the rejection of claim 30. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the circuitry is configured to apply digital predistortion to the signal desired to be transmitted based at least in part on algebraically combining the first and second signals, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based, in part, on e” [Col. 12, lines 34-35], and “generating 430, by the digital predistorter (e.g., by a controller circuit of the digital predistorter device), based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 20, line 65 to Col. 21, line 3] Regarding Claim 32, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 32 as recited above in the rejection of claim 30. In addition, Megretski further teaches that the actuator (predistortion) block 120/200 receives both the input signal u and the envelope signal e and generates the predistorted signal v . Accordingly, the actuator (predistortion) block corresponds to the claimed nonlinear combiner, wherein the circuitry comprises a nonlinear combiner configured to combine the first and second signals to generate the pre-distorted signal, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based, in part, on e” [Col. 12, lines 34-35], and “generating, by the digital predistorter, based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 9, lines 13-15] . Regarding Claim 33, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 33 as recited above in the rejection of claim 32. In addition, Megretski further teaches, utilizing one or more preprocessing blocks to apply the digital predistortion, “Described are various digital predistortion implementations that include an envelope generator that can generate a slow or fast envelope signal (depending on available bandwidth), an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 55-59], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49], and “The estimator 130 is configured to, for example, compute coefficients that weigh basis functions selected to perform the predistortion operation on the input signal u” [Col. 11, lines 37-40], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based, in part, on e” [Col. 12, lines 34-35] Regarding Claim 34, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 34 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the DPD comprises at least one of the one or more preprocessing blocks, “Described are various digital predistortion implementations that include an envelope generator that can generate a slow or fast envelope signal (depending on available bandwidth), an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 55-59], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The estimator 130 is configured to, for example, compute coefficients that weigh basis functions selected to perform the predistortion operation on the input signal u” [Col. 11, lines 37-40], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] Regarding Claim 35, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 35 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein at least one of the one or more preprocessing blocks is provided separate from the DPD, “the envelope tracking module which may be a separate module from the digital predistorter” [Col. 9, lines 21-22], and “the envelope tracker 140 may produce output based on the non-linear characteristics of the power supply modulator” [Col. 10, lines 39-41], and “the tracked envelope signal e may be directed to the actuator 120” [Col. 12, lines 15-17] Regarding Claim 36, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 36 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches selecting DPD behavior based on a finite set of operating conditions (states), wherein the control signal comprises an index signal having a discrete sequence of values take from a predetermined set of values, “temperature, transmitter power level, supply voltage, frequency band, load characteristics, etc.” [Col. 18, lines 34-36]. These are state variables drawn from defined operating conditions and used to select predistortion behavior. and wherein the transceiver system is configured to convert the index signal to an output signal used to effect an analog response in one or more components of the transmit chain, “envelope tracking power supply modulator 150” [Col. 19, lines 3-4], and “control or modulate power provided to operate the PA 114” [Col. 11, lines 63-64]. Thus, the selected state information issue to generate control outputs that alter analog operation of transmit-chain hardware (e.g., PA supply voltage via envelope tracking). Regarding Claim 38, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 38 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the one or more preprocessing blocks include at least one of: a lookup table (LUT), “a shaping table may be used to translates envelope amplitude into PA supply voltage” [Col. 1, lines 40-42], and “This function corresponds to the shaping table used in conventional envelope trackers / generators” [Col. 12, lines 63-64] Regarding Claim 39, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 39 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the one or more preprocessing blocks include at least two preprocessing blocks arranged in a cascade or in a parallel arrangement, “This essentially approximates a cascade of the approximate inverse of the predictor, P −1 , with the previous DPD configuration to yield the new DPD configuration.” [Col. 16, line 67] and [Col. 17, lines 1- 2], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basis functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-60] Regarding Claim 40, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 40 as recited above in the rejection of claim 39. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the nonlinear combiner is configured to combine the first signal with another signal output from the at least two preprocessing blocks arranged in the cascade or in the parallel arrangement, “ an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 58-59], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “generating, by the digital predistorter, based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 9, lines 13-15], and “the actuator combines an approximate inverse of the predictor with the existing DPD” [Col. 16, lines 65-66] Regarding Claim 41, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 41 as recited above in the rejection of claim 39. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the one or more preprocessing blocks include at least a first preprocessing block, a second preprocessing block, and a third preprocessing block configured to combine outputs of the first and second preprocessing blocks, “Described are various digital predistortion implementations that include an envelope generator that can generate a slow or fast envelope signal (depending on available bandwidth), an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 55-59], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The estimator 130 is configured to, for example, compute coefficients that weigh basis functions selected to perform the predistortion operation on the input signal u” [Col. 11, lines 37-40], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basic functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-58] Regarding Claim 42, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 42 as recited above in the rejection of claim 32. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the control signal is a first control signal of a plurality, and wherein the nonlinear combiner is configured to combine the first signal with the plurality of control signals or modified versions thereof to generate the pre-distorted signal, “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-68], and “Accordingly , in some embodiments , the control signal ( e.g. , an envelope tracking signal , or some signal derived from that envelope tracking signal ) may be used” [Col. 2, lines 12-14], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34] Regarding Claim 43, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 43 as recited above in the rejection of claim 30. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the control unit is configured to provide the control signal to a state actuation circuit for commanding the system state of the transmit chain, “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67], and “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-66], and “the modulating signal, e B , to modulate the PA 114” [Col. 11, lines 4-5], and “The non-linear effects of the intentional non-linear operation of the transmit chain are mitigated through dynamic (adaptable) predistortion operation” [Col. 1, lines 55-58] Regarding Claim 44, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 44 as recited above in the rejection of claim 43. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the state actuation circuit comprises a power management circuit (PMC), “Techniques such as Envelope Tracking and Average Power Tracking can be used, in some conventional implementations, to dynamically adjust the supply voltage to reduce wasted energy, and hence improve system power efficiency.” [Col. 1, lines 35-39], and “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-66], and “including the non-linear behavior of a power supply modulator 150 that controls the power provided to the power amplifier 114.” [Col. 10, lines 36-38], and “the envelope tracker 140 may produce output based on the non-linear characteristics of the power supply modulator” [Col. 10, lines 39-41] Regarding Claim 45, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 45 as recited above in the rejection of claim 30. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the control unit is a level select, “Techniques such as Envelope Tracking and Average Power Tracking can be used, in some conventional implementations, to dynamically adjust the supply voltage” [Col. 1, lines 35-38], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67] and [Col. 12, lines 1-2], and “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-66], and “the time-varying signal e is derived based on a set of constraints” [Col. 10, lines 13-14] Regarding Claim 46, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 46 as recited above in the rejection of claim 45. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the level select is configured to generate the control signal as a level select for digital supply modulation, “The present disclosure relates to digital predistortion using envelope tracking to modulate power to a transmit chain.” [Col. 1, lines 14-16], and “Techniques such as Envelope Tracking and Average Power Tracking can be used, in some conventional implementations, to dynamically adjust the supply voltage to reduce wasted energy, and hence improve system power efficiency.” [Col. 1, lines 35-39], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67], and “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-66], and “the modulating signal, e B , to modulate the PA 114” [Col. 11, lines 4-5] Regarding Claim 47, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 47 as recited above in the rejection of claim 33. In addition, Megretski further teaches, The DPD of claim 33 configured to receive and apply a plurality of coefficients to the one or more preprocessing blocks, “The estimator 130 is configured to, for example, compute coefficients that weigh basis functions selected to perform the predistortion operation on the input signal u” [Col. 11, lines 37-40], and “The estimator 130 derives the DPD coefficients based (at least indirectly) on the amplitude variations of the input signal u” [Col. 11, line 45-47], and “In another example, updating of the DPD parameters/coefficients may be implemented to generate an updated set of parameters, x′” [Col. 16, lines 38-40], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basis functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-58], and “In addition to producing coefficients to weigh the predistortion components/functions, the estimator 130 may also be configured to derive coefficients that weigh functions applied to the envelope tracking signal e” [Col. 11, lines 55-58] Regarding Claim 48, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 48 as recited above in the rejection of claim 47. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the one or more preprocessing blocks include a filter, and the DPD is configured to apply at least one of the plurality of coefficients to the filter, “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49], and “In some embodiments, the output signal, w, may be provided to a bandpass filter (not shown in FIG. 1) to remove any unwanted harmonics or other signal noise” [Col. 11, lines 13-16], and “The estimator 130 is configured to, for example, compute coefficients that weigh basis functions selected to perform the predistortion operation on the input signal u” [Col. 11, lines 37-40], and “In addition to producing coefficients to weigh the predistortion components/functions, the estimator 130 may also be configured to derive coefficients that weigh functions applied to the envelope tracking signal e” [Col. 11, lines 55-58], and “The estimator 130 derives the DPD coefficients” [Col. 11, line 45] Regarding Claim 49, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 49 as recited above in the rejection of claim 47. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein one or more of the plurality of coefficients are responsive to a state of the RF transceiver system, “the DPD coefficients Θ 320 are determined using a database of coefficients 330, and values that essentially characterize the operation “regime” (i.e., a class of physical conditions) of the transmit chain” [Col. 18, lines 27-31], and “These values (e.g., quantitative or categorical digital variables) include environment variables 332 (e.g., temperature, transmitter power level, supply voltage, frequency band, load characteristics, etc.)” [Col. 18, lines 33-36], and “The determined characteristics and metrics may be used to estimate/derive appropriate DPD coefficients” [Col. 18, lines 42-44], and “The DPD coefficients used to control/adjust the DPD 310 may be determined by selecting two or more sets of DPD coefficients from a plurality of sets of DPD coefficients (maintained in the database 330) based on the system characteristics” [Col. 18, lines 63-67], and “ the coefficients derived by the estimator 130 are affected by the amplitude variation behavior tracked by the envelope tracker 140.” [Col. 11, lines 52-54] Regarding Claim 50, Megretski teaches that linearization system 100 including transmitter chain 110 corresponds to the claimed RF transceiver system having a transmit chain, and envelope tracker/generator 140 corresponds to the claimed control unit because the envelope tracker/generator 140 generates the envelope signal e used to regulate operation of the power amplifier and transmit chain, in a radio frequency (RF) transceiver system having a transmit chain and a control unit, a method comprising: “Thus, with reference to FIG. 1, a schematic diagram of an example linearization system 100, comprising a power amplifier 114 whose operational power (and thus non-linear behavior) is controlled based on an envelope tracking signal e produced by an envelope generator (tracker) 140, and based on the system's input signal, u, is shown.” [Col. 10, lines 27-32], and “The linearization system 100 includes a transmitter chain 110 used to perform the transmission processing on signals produced by an actuator (implementing a digital predistorter, or DPD) 120.” [Col. 10, lines 47-50], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67] receiving a first signal corresponding to a signal desired to be transmitted via the transmit chain or a modified version of said signal, “The method includes receiving (by a digital predistorter) a first signal that depends on amplitude variations based on an input signal, u” [Col. 9, lines 7-9], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34],and “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u” [Col. 12, lines 28-29] receiving, from the control unit, a second signal corresponding to a control signal for commanding a system state of the transmit chain or a translated version of the control signal, “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e” [Col. 11, lines 65-66], and “The method further includes determining, by the envelope tracking module, based on amplitude variations of the input signal u, a time-varying signal, e” [Col. 9, lines 40-42], and ““The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-68], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] applying digital predistortion to the signal desired to be transmitted based at least in part on combining the first and second signals, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “generating 430, by the digital predistorter (e.g., by a controller circuit of the digital predistorter device), based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 20, lines 65-67] and [Col. 21, lines 1-3] and providing a resulting pre-distorted signal to the transmit chain operating at the system state, “providing the predistorted signal v to the transmit chain” [Col. 9, line 15-16], and “The linearization system 100 includes a transmitter chain 110 used to perform the transmission processing on signals produced by an actuator (implementing a digital predistorter, or DPD) 120.” [Col. 10, lines 47-50], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67] Regarding Claim 51, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 51 as recited above in the rejection of claim 50. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein applying the digital predistortion includes algebraically combining the first and second signals, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “generating 430, by the digital predistorter (e.g., by a controller circuit of the digital predistorter device), based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 20, lines 65-67] and [Col. 21, lines 1-3], and further Megretski teaches algebraic predistortion operations “ PNG media_image1.png 50 195 media_image1.png Greyscale ” [Col. 16, lines 50-55], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basic functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-60] Regarding Claim 52, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 52 as recited above in the rejection of claim 50. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein applying the digital predistortion includes combining the first and second signals using a nonlinear combiner, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basis functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-60] , and “Particularly, because the envelope tracker 140 produces a signal that corresponds to the amplitude variations of the input signal u, and that signal is used to control the non-linear behavior of the PA, which in turn impacts the output of the transmit chain, the coefficients derived by the estimator 130 are affected by the amplitude variation behavior tracked by the envelope tracker 140.” [Col. 11, lines 48-54] Regarding Claim 54, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 54 as recited above in the rejection of claim 52. In addition, Megretski further teaches, preprocessing at least one of: the signal desired to be transmitted, “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u” [Col. 12, lines 28-29] Regarding Claim 55, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 55 as recited above in the rejection of claim 54. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the control signal comprises an index signal having a discrete sequence of values take from a predetermined set of values, and wherein the transceiver system is configured to convert the index signal to an output signal effecting an analog response in one or more components of the transmit chain, “Accordingly, in some embodiments, the envelope tracker 140 is implemented to generate a digital envelope signal e=e[t] (for the purposes of the present description, the notation t represents discrete digital samples or instances)” [Col. 12, lines 54-58], and “the time-varying signal e is derived based on a set of constraints” [Col. 10, lines 13-14], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67], and “the tracked envelope signal e may be directed to the actuator 120” [Col. 12, lines 15-17], and “the modulating signal, e B , to modulate the PA 114” [Col. 11, lines 4-5], and “power supply modulator 150 that controls the power provided to the power amplifier 114.” [Col. 10, lines 37-38] Regarding Claim 57, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 57 as recited above in the rejection of claim 53. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the preprocessing includes using at least one of: a function, “where the function h(.) defines the relation between the instantaneous power of the baseband signal and the power supply” [Col. 12, lines 60-62], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basis functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-60], “The solution for x is therefore: x =( A H A ) −1 A H b. ” [Col. 17, lines 23-25] Regarding Claim 58, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 58 as recited above in the rejection of claim 52. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the control signal is a first control signal of a plurality, “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-66], and “The at least some non-linear behavior of the transmit chain, resulting from regulating the power supply based on the one or more control signals, is at least partly mitigated through digital predistortion” [Col. 24, lines 47-51] and wherein combining the first and second signals using the nonlinear combiner includes combining the first signal with the plurality of control signals or modified versions thereof to generate the pre-distorted signal, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The actuator also generates the signal e A , optionally based, in part, on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 37-38], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] Regarding Claim 93, Megretski teaches, a method for digital pre-distorter (DPD) comprising: “Thus, in some embodiments, an example method for digital predistortion, generally performed at a digital predistorter of a linearization system, is provided” [Col. 9, lines 4-6] generating a digital control signal for controlling a system state of a radio frequency (RF) transmit chain, wherein the digital control signal is derived at least in part from an RF signal to be transmitted, “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67], and “Particularly, because the envelope tracker 140 produces a signal that corresponds to the amplitude variations of the input signal u, and that signal is used to control the non-linear behavior of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 48-51], and “In some examples, the time-varying signal e is generated from the input signal u” [Col. 9, lines 23-25] translating the digital control signal, “The actuator also generates the signal e A , optionally based, in part, on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 37-38], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] algebraically combining at least the translated digital control signal and the RF signal to be transmitted or a translated version of the RF signal to be transmitted to generate a predistorted signal, “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The parameters, x, in combination with the basis functions represent the difference between the model of the nonlinear input/output characteristics of the transmit chain” [Col. 16, lines 56-60] and providing the predistorted signal to the RF transmit chain, “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “providing the predistorted signal v to the transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 16-17] Regarding Claim 94, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 94 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the digital control signal comprises a level select signal, wherein control signal eB corresponds to the claimed level select signal because eB controls the power supplied to the PA and is expressly disclosed as “the signal modulating the power level of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 42-43], and “a signal representative of the voltage level to be applied to the PA” [Col. 10, lines 60-61] Regarding Claim 95, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 95 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the system state is a power amplifier supply voltage controlled using a power management circuit, “The method includes receiving, by a power supply modulator, one or more control signals, and regulating, based on the one or more control signals, power supply provided to a power amplifier of a transmit chain” [Col. 9, lines 62-68], and “Techniques such as Envelope Tracking and Average Power Tracking can be used, in some conventional implementations, to dynamically adjust the supply voltage to reduce wasted energy, and hence improve system power efficiency.” [Col. 1, lines 35-39], and “power supply modulator 150 that controls the power provided to the power amplifier 114.” [Col. 10, lines 37-38], and “Thus, for example, the envelope tracker 140 may produce output based on the non-linear characteristics of the power supply modulator (and/or non-linear characteristics of other modules/units of the system 100) with such output either provided directly to the power supply modulator” [Col. 10, lines 39-43] Regarding Claim 96, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 96 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein translating the digital control signal comprises filtering the digital control signal, “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49], and “In some embodiments, the signal e may also be provided (in addition to, or instead of) to the power supply modulator 150” [Col. 12, lines 23-25], and “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e” [Col. 11, lines 65-66] Regarding Claim 98, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 98 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein algebraically combining at least the translated digital control signal and the RF signal to be transmitted or a translated version of the RF signal to be transmitted includes algebraically combining at least the translated digital control signal and the translated version of the RF signal corresponding to an amplitude of the RF signal to be transmitted, “Particularly, because the envelope tracker 140 produces a signal that corresponds to the amplitude variations of the input signal u, and that signal is used to control the non-linear behavior of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 48-51], and “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u (e.g., a digital signal with 500 Msps) and also receives the tracked envelope signal e” [Col. 12, lines 28-30], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “The actuator also generates the signal e A , optionally based, in part, on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 37-38], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] Regarding Claim 100, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 100 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the RF signal to be transmitted is an input signal or a modified version thereof, “the actuator 200 (DPD engine) receives the input signal u ” [Col. 12, lines 28-29], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v” [Col. 12, lines 33-34] Regarding Claim 101, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 101 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the digital control signal is the digital control signal or a translated version thereof, “the envelope tracker/generator 140 is configured to generate an envelope signal e which is appropriate for the given input baseband signal u and for the power amplifier implementation in order to regulate the operation (including the non-linear behavior) of the PA” [Col. 11, lines 65-67], and “The actuator also generates the signal e A , optionally based, in part, on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 37-38], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49] Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 AIA 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 37, 56, 97, 99 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Megretski et al. (US 10931238 B2, hereinafter “Megretski”), and further in view of Yu et al. (US 9628120 B2, hereinafter “Yu”) Regarding Claim 37, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 37 as recited above in the rejection of claim 36. In addition, Megretski further teaches, the nonlinear combiner is configured to combine the first signal with the digitized analog signal to generate the pre-distorted signal, “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope” [Col. 8, lines 58-59], and “generating, by the digital predistorter, based at least in part on signals comprising the input signal u and the first signal, a digitally predistorted signal v” [Col. 9, lines 13-15] However, Megretski does not expressly teach, wherein at least one of the one or more preprocessing blocks is configured to translate the index signal to a digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced in the one or more components of the transmit chain. In the same field of endeavor, Yu teaches that RF feedback signal 115 is produced from the output response of power amplifier 108 and is fed back through signal analyzer integrated circuit 102, wherein at least one of the one or more preprocessing blocks is configured to translate the index signal to a digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced in the one or more components of the transmit chain, “The output signal 115 of power amplifier 108 is fed back in system 100 through another CMOS integrated circuit, represented by circuit block 102. Circuit block 102 represents a signal-analyzer integrated circuit, which is used for adaptive control of DPD operations of system 100.” [Col. 5, lines 62-66], and “The down-converted analog signal is converted into digital representation (i.e., digital signal 117) using ADCs 111.” [Col. 6, lines 2-4], and “RF feedback signal 115 is converted to analog in-phase and quadrature signals by quadrature down-converter 110 in signal analyzer integrated circuit 102” [Col. 8, lines 27-29], and “The output I/Q signals of quadrature down-converter 110 are converted to digital signals by ADCs 111” [Col. 8, lines 34-36]. Accordingly, RF feedback signal 115 corresponds to the claimed digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced by the transmit chain/power amplifier. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Megretski with the teachings of Yu to provide a digital representation of a feedback signal corresponding to the output response of the power amplifier for use in digital predistortion adaption and control, thereby improving characterization and compensation of transmit-chain behavior. Regarding Claim 56, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 56 as recited above in the rejection of claim 55. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein combining the first and second signals using the nonlinear combiner includes combining the first signal with the digitized analog signal to generate the pre-distorted signal, “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “the actuator 120 is configured to perform the digital predistortion by using the time-varying control signal e in the digital predistortion of the input signal u” [Col. 14, lines 11-13], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61], However, Megretski does not expressly teach, wherein the preprocessing includes translating the index signal to a digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced in the one or more components of the transmit chain. In the same field of endeavor, Yu teaches, wherein the preprocessing includes translating the index signal to a digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced in the one or more components of the transmit chain, “The output signal 115 of power amplifier 108 is fed back in system 100 through another CMOS integrated circuit, represented by circuit block 102. Circuit block 102 represents a signal-analyzer integrated circuit, which is used for adaptive control of DPD operations of system 100.” [Col. 5, lines 62-66], and “The down-converted analog signal is converted into digital representation (i.e., digital signal 117) using ADCs 111.” [Col. 6, lines 2-4], and “RF feedback signal 115 is converted to analog in-phase and quadrature signals by quadrature down-converter 110 in signal analyzer integrated circuit 102” [Col. 8, lines 27-29], and “The output I/Q signals of quadrature down-converter 110 are converted to digital signals by ADCs 111” [Col. 8, lines 34-36]. Accordingly, RF feedback signal 115 corresponds to the claimed index signal because it is the analog response generated by power amplifier 108 and fed back through the signal analyzer circuitry. Digital signal 117 corresponds to the claimed digitized analog signal because the down-converted analog response is converted into digital representation by ADCs 111. Thus, Yu teaches translating the claimed index signal into a digitized analog signal correlated with the analog response produced by the transmit chain. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify Megretski with the teaching of Yu so that the signal used in digital predistortion processing includes a digital representation of a feedback signal corresponding to the output response of the power amplifier, thereby improving characterization of transmit-chain behavior and improving digital predistortion adaption and compensation accuracy. Regarding Claim 97, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 97 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. However, Megretski does not expressly teach, wherein translating the digital control signal comprises delaying the digital control signal. In the same field of endeavor, Yu teaches, wherein translating the digital control signal comprises delaying the digital control signal, “The memory-less non-linearity of block 201 is applied to a copy of the input signal delayed in delay element 202 by £ samples” [Col. 6, lines 24-27] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Megretski’s translated digital control signal processing with Yu’s delayed-signal processing because Yu teaches using delayed signal versions in predistortion processing to compensate for memory effects and improve transmitter linearization performance. The modification would merely apply a known signal-processing techniques to Megretski’s predistortion architecture for its known purpose. Regarding Claim 99, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 99 as recited above in the rejection of claim 93. However, Megretski does not expressly teach, delaying the RF signal to be transmitted or a translated version thereof with a delay circuit. In the same field of endeavor, Yu teaches, delaying the RF signal to be transmitted or a translated version thereof with a delay circuit, “FIG. 5 also shows complex gain and delay matching by finite impulse response (FIR) filter 503 a and integer delay circuit 503 b in the signal paths of RF feedback signal 115 and power amplifier input feedback signal 410, respectively.” [Col. 9, lines 58-61], and “ FIR filter 503 a includes a complex-coefficient FIR filter that provides, not only delay matching, but also linear distortion correction” [Col. 9, lines 62-64] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Yu’s delay-circuit processing into Megretski’s predistortion system because Yu teaches that delay matching improves signal alignment and predistortion accuracy. Applying a known delay circuit to the RF signal path of Megretski would have predictably improved signal processing performance while using known techniques for their established purpose . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Megretski et al. (US 10931238 B2, hereinafter “Megretski”), and further in view of Chandrasekaran (US 8711976 B2, hereinafter “Chandrasekaran”) Regarding Claim 53, Megretski discloses the limitations of claim 53 as recited above in the rejection of claim 52. In addition, Megretski further teaches, wherein the nonlinear combiner is configured to combine the first signal with the another signal to generate the pre-distorted signal, “The actuator also generates the signal e A , optionally based, in part, on the signal u” [Col. 12, lines 37-38], and “the new signal e A need not be based on the time-varying signal u, but instead may be, for example, a down-sampled version of the signal e, or may otherwise be a resultant signal processed (through some pre-determined filtering process) from the signal e.” [Col. 12, lines 45-49], and “The actuator 200 predistorts the signal u to generate the predistorted signal v based , in part , on e” [Col. 12, lines 33-34], and “an actuator (predistortion) block that depends on both the signal itself and the envelope to thus use the envelope signal e (in addition to u) to generate the pre-distorted output v provided to the transmit chain” [Col. 8, lines 58-61] However, Megretski does not expressly teach, preprocessing the second signal with a first preprocessing block to form a first preprocessed signal; preprocessing a third signal with a second preprocessing block to form a second preprocessed signal; and combining the first and second preprocessed signals with a third preprocessing block to form another signal. In the same field of endeavor, Chandrasekaran teaches, preprocessing the second signal with a first preprocessing block to form a first preprocessed signal, as shown in [FIG. 3], a first signal path includes Lookup Table f11 (3160 and Filter h1 (318), where the output of Lookup Table f11 (316) is processed by Filter h1 (318) to generate a processed signal. (see [FIG. 3]) preprocessing a third signal with a second preprocessing block to form a second preprocessed signal, as shown in [FIG. 3], a second signal path includes Lookup Table f21 (326) and Filter h2 (328), where the output of Lookup Table f21 (326) is processed by Filter h2 (328) to generate another processed signal. (see [FIG. 3]) combining the first and second preprocessed signals with a third preprocessing block to form another signal, as shown in [FIG. 3], the outputs of the multiple preprocessing path are provided to subsequent processing circuitry including Complex Multiplier 330 and are ultimately combined by Sum block 312 to generate output signal xpd[n]. Thus, Chandrasekaran teaches combining processed signals from multiple preprocessing signals from multiple preprocessing paths to form another signal that contributes to the predistorted output signal. (see [FIG. 3]) Which receives inputs from the signal paths associated with Filter h2 (328) and Lookup Table f21 (326), and produces an output signal that is supplied toward Sum block 312. [FIG. 3]. Thus, Complex Multiplier 330 corresponds to the claimed their preprocessing block that combines processed signal paths to form another signal. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Megretski with the teachings of Chandrasekaran because Chandrasekaran teaches multiple predistortion processing paths and combining the resulting processed terms using summation block 312. Applying Chandrasekaran’s known signal-processing architecture to Megretski would have predictably improved predistortion modeling and nonlinear distortion compensation. Conclusion 07-96 The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure: McCoy et al. (US 20170033915 A1) Digital Predistortion for Full-Duplex Radio discloses relating to use of digital predistortion in the context of full-duplex radio. In some embodiments, an apparatus includes one or more antennas and is configured to simultaneously transmit and receive wireless signals via at least partially overlapping frequency resources using the one or more antennas. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG PHUOC LE whose telephone number is (571)272-3659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:30 pm. 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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. SANG PHUOC. LE Examiner Art Unit 2641 /SANG PHUOC LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2641 /CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 2 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 3 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 4 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 5 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 6 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 7 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 8 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 9 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 10 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 11 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 12 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 13 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 14 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 15 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 16 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 17 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 18 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 19 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 20 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 21 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 22 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 23 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 24 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 25 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 26 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 27 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 28 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 29 Art Unit: 2641 Application/Control Number: 18/735,639 Page 30 Art Unit: 2641
Prosecution Insights