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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 does not contain any limitations that further limit claim 1. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation “A base station” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 15-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Masood et al. (US 10,003,310).
In regard to Claim 1:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, a power amplifier system with symbol-based envelope tracking, the power amplifier system comprising:
a voltage modulator circuit (190) configured to generate an output bias voltage (194) that tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal (Column 6: lines 43-53), the voltage modulator circuit (190) configured to adjust the output bias voltage (194) on symbol boundaries (Column 6: lines 53-57);
a power amplifier (180) configured to receive the output bias voltage (194) and amplify the radio frequency signal (130); and
a signal path (130, 132, 160, 170 signal path) configured to provide the radio frequency signal (130) to the power amplifier (180), the signal path comprising a crest factor reduction block (Figure 2: 210; Figure 2 is the detailed view of 116) configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold such that the crest factor reduction threshold corresponds to the output bias voltage (Column 8: lines 11-18).
In regard to Claim 2:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, The power amplifier system of Claim 1, further comprising a quantizer (Figure 2: 212; Figure 2 is a detailed view of 116) configured to determine a symbol-based envelope tracking state based on transmit signal power (Column 6: lines 43-59), wherein the voltage modulator circuit (190) is configured to generate the output bias voltage based on the symbol-based envelope tracking state (Column 6: lines 53-57), and the crest factor reduction block (Figure 2: 210) is configured to adjust the crest factor reduction threshold based on the symbol-based envelope tracking state (Column 8: lines 11-18).
In regard to Claim 15:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, a base station (Column 2: lines 18-38) comprising the power amplifier system of Claim 1 (see the rejection of Claim 1 above).
In regard to Claim 16:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, a method of radio frequency signal amplification with symbol-based envelope tracking, the method comprising:
determining a symbol-based envelope tracking state based on transmit signal power (Column 6: lines 43-59);
toggling an output bias voltage (194) between a plurality of discrete voltage levels on symbol boundaries of a radio frequency signal (130) based on the symbol-based envelope tracking state, wherein the output bias voltage (194) is provided to a power amplifier (180);
adjusting a crest factor reduction threshold (Column 8: lines 11-18) of a crest factor reduction block (Figure 2: 210; Figure 2 is the detailed view of 116) based on the symbol-based envelope tracking state, the crest factor reduction block (Figure 2: 210; Figure 2 is the detailed view of 116) being in a signal path (210 is located in 116 which is in the signal path connecting 130 to 180) that provides the radio frequency signal (130) to the power amplifier (180); and
amplifying the radio frequency signal (130) with the power amplifier (180).
In regard to Claim 17:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, the method of Claim 16, further comprising adjusting digital predistortion in the signal path based on the symbol-based envelope tracking state (Column 5: lines 1-24).
In regard to Claim 20:
Masood discloses, in Figure 1, a system with symbol-based envelope tracking, the system comprising:
means (190) for generating an output bias voltage (194) that tracks a root mean square symbol power of a radio frequency signal (130) on a symbol-by-symbol basis (Column 6: lines 43-59); and
a signal path (130, 132, 160, 170 signal path) configured to provide the radio frequency signal (130), the signal path comprising a crest factor reduction block (Figure 2: 210; Figure 2 is the detailed view of 116) configured to adjust a crest factor reduction threshold such that the crest factor reduction threshold corresponds to the output bias voltage (194, Column 8: lines 11-18).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-14 and 18-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pratt et al. (US 9,641,206) discloses a highly integrated cellular transceiver that offers such features by providing one or more digital functions on-chip, onto the same die in the cellular transceiver.
Shute (US 2023/0085587) discloses an amplification system that may include a first amplifier configured to generate an amplifier output voltage, a second amplifier having an output coupled to a supply node for the first amplifier, a voltage regulator having an output coupled to a supply node for the second amplifier, and control circuitry configured to control the voltage regulator to generate a supply voltage at the supply node for the second amplifier based on an indication associated with the amplifier output voltage.
Beaudin et al. (US 10,056,875) discloses a radio frequency front end of a user equipment for reducing power consumption includes a receive chain having a first low noise amplifier stage, a transmit chain including a first power amplifier stage, a transmit bypass path, a receive bypass path and a time division duplex swit
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John W Poos whose telephone number is (571)270-5077. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN W POOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights