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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for domestic benefit based on provisional application No. 63/512,041. However, the subject matter of claim 20 is not present in the provisional application (claim 20 recites voltage modulator transition time between 5 and 200 nanoseconds, while the provisional application only recites a transition time of 10’s of nanoseconds [see paragraph 12]), so therefore, claim 20 does not receive the benefit of the provisional application.
Specification
The use of the terms LTE® (see Paragraphs 53, 81, and 88) and Wi-Fi® (see Paragraph 105), which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized wherever they appear or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the terms.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On Paragraph 1, line 7, replace “U.S. Application No. ________” with “U.S. Application No. 18/763,969”.
On Paragraph 86, line 6, insert a space between “the power transistor” and “407”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 7, and 15-16, and 19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of copending Application No. 18/763,969 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present application claims are anticipated by the reference application claims.
Regarding present application claim 1, claim 3 of the reference application recites limitations similar to the limitations recited in claim 1 of the present application. However, claim 3 of the reference application recites additional features not present in present application claim 1. Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claim 1 under an anticipation-type double patenting rejection. See detailed mapping of claim limitations below.
Present Application No. 18/763,905
Reference Application No. 18/763,969
1. A power amplifier system with symbol based envelope tracking,
3. A power amplifier system with symbol based envelope tracking,
the power amplifier system comprising: a voltage modulator circuit configured to generate an output bias voltage based on a symbol based envelope tracking state
wherein the voltage modulator circuit is configured to generate the output bias voltage based on the symbol based envelope tracking state,
such that the output bias voltage tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal on a symbol by symbol basis;
a voltage modulator circuit configured to generate an output bias voltage that tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal, the voltage modulator circuit configured to adjust the output bias voltage on symbol boundaries;
a power amplifier configured to receive the output bias voltage and amplify the radio frequency signal;
a power amplifier configured to receive the output bias voltage and amplify the radio frequency signal;
and a signal path configured to provide the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier,
and a signal path configured to provide the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier,
the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
wherein the signal path comprises a digital predistortion system . . . wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
Regarding present application claims 4, 7, 15-16, and 19, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claims 4, 7, 15-16, and 19 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 additional features not present in claims 4, 7, 15-16, and 19 of the present application, as described above for present application claim 1. Reference application claim 3 recites the additional features of present application claims 4, 7, 15-16, and 19, so therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claims 4, 7, 15-16, and 19 under an anticipation-type double patenting rejection.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 8-14, 17-18, and 20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 (for claims 2-3, 5-6, 11, and 17-18), claim 6 (for claim 8), claim 9 (for claim 9), claim 13 (for claim 20), claim 14 (for claim 10), claim 16 (for claim 12), claim 18 (for claim 13), and claim 19 (for claim 14) of copending Application No. 18/763,969 in view of Masood et al. (Patent Number US 10,003,310 B1), as cited by applicant, hereafter referred to as Masood.
Regarding present application claim 2, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claim 2 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 recites additional features not present in claim 2 of the present application, as described above for present application claim 1, and present application claim 2 additionally recites “wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting digital predistortion coefficients”.
However, Masood teaches wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting digital predistortion coefficients (Masood, Col. 5, lines 17-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claim 3 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claim 2 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claim 3, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claim 3 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 recites additional features not present in claim 3 of the present application, as described above for present application claim 1, and present application claim 3 additionally recites “wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting a digital predistortion actuator”.
However, Masood teaches wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting a digital predistortion actuator (Masood, Col. 12, lines 1-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claim 3 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claim 3 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claims 5 and 18, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claims 5 and 18 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 recites additional features not present in claims 5 and 18 of the present application, as described above for present application claims 4 and 16, respectively, and present application claims 5 and 18 additionally recites “wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers”.
However, Masood teaches wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers (Masood, Col. 8, lines 1-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claim 3 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claims 5 and 18 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claims 6 and 17, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claims 6 and 17 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 recites additional features not present in claims 6 and 17 of the present application, as described above for present application claims 4 and 16, respectively, and present application claims 6 and 17 additionally recites “further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system”.
However, Masood teaches further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system (Masood, Col. 12, lines 56-60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claim 3 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claim 3 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claims 6 and 17 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claims 8, 9, and 10, reference application claims 6, 9, and 14, respectively, recite features similar to the limitations recited in claims 8, 9, and 10 of the present application. However, reference application claims 6, 9, and 14, respectively, recite additional features not present in claims 8, 9, and 10 of the present application, as described above for present application claim 1, and present application claims 8, 9, and 10 additionally recite “the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state”.
However, Masood teaches the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system (Masood, Fig. 1, 116) configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Col. 5, lines 5-10 and 20-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claims 6, 9, and 14 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claims 6, 9, and 14, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claims 6, 9, and 14 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claims 6, 9, and 14, respectively, meet present application claims 8, 9, and 10 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claim 11, reference application claim 3 recites features similar to the limitations recited in claim 11 of the present application. However, reference application claim 3 recites additional features not present in claim 11 of the present application, as described above for present application claim 1, and present application claim 11 additionally recites “wherein the power amplifier is a Doherty power amplifier”.
However, Masood teaches wherein the power amplifier is a Doherty power amplifier (Masood, Fig. 1, 180, see also Col. 5, lines 59-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claim 3 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to implement the power amplifier of reference application claim 3 as a Doherty power amplifier, which would have the effect of providing a well-known implementation for the power amplifier of reference application claim 3. Therefore, reference application claim 3 meets present application claim 11 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Regarding present application claims 12, 13, 14, and 20 reference application claims 16, 18, 19, and 13, respectively, recite features similar to the limitations recited in claims 12, 13, and 14, and 20 of the present application. However, reference application claims 16, 18, 19, and 13, respectively, recite additional features not present in claims 12, 13, 14, and 20 of the present application, similar to those as described above for present application claim 1, and present application claims 12, 13, 14, and 20 additionally recite “adjusting digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state, wherein a digital predistortion system that performs the digital predistortion is in a signal path that provides the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier”.
However, Masood teaches adjusting digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Masood, Col. 5, lines 5-10 and 20-24), wherein a digital predistortion system (Fig. 1, 116) that performs the digital predistortion is in a signal path that provides the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier (Fig. 1, see connection between digital predistortion system 116 and power amplifier 180).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified claims 16, 18, 19, and 13 of the reference application to incorporate the teachings of Masood to incorporate the digital predistortion system of Masood into the power amplifier system of reference application claims 16, 18, 19, and 13 which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier system of reference application claims 16, 18, 19, and 13 (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11). Therefore, reference application claims 16, 18, 19, and 13, respectively, meet present application claims 12, 13, 14, and 20 under an obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from 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.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomiyama et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2019/0334480 A1), hereafter referred to as Nomiyama, and Masood.
Regarding claim 1, Nomiyama discloses:
A power amplifier system (Nomiyama, Fig. 1, 100) with symbol based envelope tracking (Fig. 1, 130), the power amplifier system comprising: a voltage modulator circuit (Fig. 1, 130) configured to generate an output bias voltage based on a symbol based envelope tracking state such that the output bias voltage tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal on a symbol by symbol basis (Paragraph 32, lines 3-14); a power amplifier (Fig. 1, 170) configured to receive the output bias voltage (Fig. 1, see connection between 130 and 170 with voltage Vsel) and amplify the radio frequency signal (Fig. 1, see RFIN and RFOUT at power amplifier 170); and a signal path configured to provide the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier (Fig. 1, see signal path from RFIN to RFOUT through power amplifier 170), but fails to disclose the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
However, Masood teaches the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system (Masood, Fig. 1, 116) configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Col. 5, lines 5-10 and 20-24).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 2, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting digital predistortion coefficients.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting digital predistortion coefficients (Masood, Col. 5, lines 17-24).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 3, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting a digital predistortion actuator.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the digital predistortion system is configured to adjust digital predistortion by at least adjusting a digital predistortion actuator (Masood, Col. 12, lines 1-4).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 4, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
further comprising a quantizer configured to determine the symbol based envelope tracking state based on transmit signal power.
However, Masood further teaches further comprising a quantizer configured to determine the symbol based envelope tracking state based on transmit signal power (Masood, Col. 8, lines 25-37).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 5, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers (Masood, Col. 8, lines 1-10).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 6, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system.
However, Masood further teaches further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system (Masood, Col. 12, lines 56-60).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 7, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the signal path comprises a crest factor reduction block configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the signal path comprises a crest factor reduction block (Masood, Fig. 2, 210) configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Nomiyama, Col. 8, lines 11-18).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 8, Nomiyama further discloses:
wherein the power amplifier system is operable in a discontinuous transmit state (Nomiyama, Fig. 20A, consider activating current source 2150 with signal DN, connecting power supply of the power amplifier to ground).
Regarding claim 9, Nomiyama further discloses:
and the voltage modulator circuit is configured to adjust the output bias voltage corresponding to symbol boundaries of a carrier of the at least two carriers with a shortest symbol period (Nomiyama, Fig. 11, consider transitions between levels of bias voltage VSPT at symbol group boundaries t2, t4, and t6), but fails to disclose wherein the radio frequency signal comprises at least two carriers with different symbol lengths.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the radio frequency signal comprises at least two carriers with different symbol lengths (Masood, Col. 9, line 60-Col. 10, line 1).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 10, Nomiyama further discloses:
wherein the voltage modulator circuit is configured to transition the output bias voltage between discrete voltage levels of at least 4 discrete voltage levels on symbol boundaries (Nomiyama, Fig. 11, consider that bias voltage VSPT transitions between 4 discrete voltage levels on the boundaries of the symbol groups).
Regarding claim 11, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the power amplifier is a Doherty power amplifier.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the power amplifier is a Doherty power amplifier (Masood, Fig. 1, 180, see also Col. 5, lines 59-67).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to implement the power amplifier of Nomiyama as a Doherty power amplifier, which would have the effect of providing a well-known implementation for the generic power amplifier of Nomiyama.
Regarding claim 12, Nomiyama discloses:
A method of radio frequency signal amplification (Nomiyama, Fig. 1, 100) with symbol based envelope tracking (Fig. 1, 130), the method comprising: determining a symbol based envelope tracking state based on transmit signal power (Paragraph 32, lines 3-14); toggling an output bias voltage between a plurality of discrete voltage levels on symbol boundaries of a radio frequency signal based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Fig. 11, consider that bias voltage VSPT transitions between 4 discrete voltage levels on the boundaries of the symbol groups), wherein the output bias voltage is provided to a power amplifier (Fig. 1, see connection between power amplifier 170 and voltage Vsel); and amplifying the radio frequency signal with the power amplifier (Fig. 1, see RFIN and RFOUT at power amplifier 170), but fails to disclose adjusting digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state, wherein a digital predistortion system that performs the digital predistortion is in a signal path that provides the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier.
However, Masood teaches adjusting digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Masood, Col. 5, lines 5-10 and 20-24), wherein a digital predistortion system (Fig. 1, 116) that performs the digital predistortion is in a signal path that provides the radio frequency signal to the power amplifier (Fig. 1, see connection between digital predistortion system 116 and power amplifier 180).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 13, Nomiyama further discloses:
further comprising operating a power amplifier system that includes the power amplifier in a discontinuous transmit state (Nomiyama, Fig. 20A, consider activating current source 2150 with signal DN, connecting power supply of the power amplifier to ground).
Regarding claim 14, Nomiyama further discloses:
and the toggling occurs on symbol boundaries of a carrier of the two carriers with a shorter symbol period (Nomiyama, Fig. 11, consider transitions between levels of bias voltage VSPT at symbol group boundaries t2, t4, and t6), but fails to disclose wherein the radio frequency signal comprises two carriers having different symbol periods.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the radio frequency signal comprises two carriers having different symbol periods (Masood, Col. 9, line 60-Col. 10, line 1).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 15, Nomiyama discloses:
A system (Nomiyama, Fig. 1, 100) with symbol based envelope tracking (Fig. 1, 130), the system comprising: a voltage modulator circuit (Fig. 1, 130) configured to generate an output bias voltage based on a symbol based envelope tracking state such that the output bias voltage tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal on a symbol by symbol basis (Paragraph 32, lines 3-14); and a signal path configured to provide the radio frequency signal (Fig. 1, see signal path from RFIN to RFOUT through power amplifier 170), but fails to disclose the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
However, Masood teaches the signal path comprising a digital predistortion system (Masood, Fig. 1, 116) configured to adjust digital predistortion based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Col. 5, lines 5-10 and 20-24).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 16, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
further comprising a quantizer configured to determine the symbol based envelope tracking state based on an indication of transmit power.
However, Masood further teaches further comprising a quantizer configured to determine the symbol based envelope tracking state based on an indication of transmit power (Masood, Col. 8, lines 25-37).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 17, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system.
However, Masood further teaches further comprising one or more delay blocks coupled between the quantizer and the digital predistortion system (Masood, Col. 12, lines 56-60).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 18, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the quantizer is configured to receive a composite transmit symbol power associated with a plurality of carriers (Masood, Col. 8, lines 1-10).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 19, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the signal path comprises a crest factor reduction block configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold based on the symbol based envelope tracking state.
However, Masood further teaches wherein the signal path comprises a crest factor reduction block (Masood, Fig. 2, 210) configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold based on the symbol based envelope tracking state (Nomiyama, Col. 8, lines 11-18).
Nomiyama and Masood are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Masood to include the digital predistortion system of Masood in the circuit of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of improving the linearity of the power amplifier of Nomiyama (Masood, Col. 3, lines 5-11).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomiyama in view of Masood as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Garrett et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2021/0313936 A1), hereafter referred to as Garrett.
Regarding claim 20, Nomiyama fails to disclose:
wherein the voltage modulator circuit is configured to transition the output bias voltage between discrete voltage levels of a plurality of discrete voltage levels in a time that is in a range between 5 nanoseconds and 200 nanoseconds.
However, Garrett teaches wherein the voltage modulator circuit is configured to transition the output bias voltage between discrete voltage levels of a plurality of discrete voltage levels in a time that is in a range between 5 nanoseconds and 200 nanoseconds (Garrett, Paragraph 52, lines 13-21).
Nomiyama, Masood, and Garrett are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of improving power amplifiers used in radio frequency communications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Nomiyama to incorporate the teachings of Garrett to include the voltage modulator timing of Garrett for the voltage modulator of Nomiyama, which would have the effect of providing rapid envelope tracking for the system of Nomiyama (Garrett, Paragraph 52, lines 1-7).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Carvalho et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2021/0006207 A1) discloses (Figs. 2A-B) a power amplifier envelope tracking system.
Yan et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2017/0005676 A1) discloses (Fig. 3) a quantizer used for a power amplifier envelope tracking system.
Briffa et al. (Patent Publication Number US 2014/0118072 A1) discloses (Fig. 9) a power supply voltage modulator with four discrete supply voltages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lance T Bartol whose telephone number is (703)756-1267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 6:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. CT, Alternating Fridays 6:30 - 3:00.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/LANCE TORBJORN BARTOL/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights