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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ communication filed on 07/23/2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ross et al. (US 2007/0064842 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 Ross teaches the limitations "A communication device, comprising: a receiver circuit configured to receive a communication signal; and a processor circuit (see abstract, fig. 1 and par. 0012 (station 101, Rx 120, processor 111);
configured to utilize a first period to calculate a delay correlation function of the communication signal to determine a first delay correlation information, (see fig. 3 (310) and par. 0041-0042, where delay correlation is performed on signal delayed by first period T1);
utilize a second period to calculate the delay correlation function of the communication signal to determine a second delay correlation information and (see fig. 3 (320) and par. 0043, where delay correlation is performed on same signal delayed by a second period T2);
determine whether the communication signal is interference according to the first delay correlation information and the second delay correlation information, (see fig. 3 (330) and par. 0046, where the processor determines “whether the incoming input is or includes a valid wireless communication signal intended for reception, or, conversely, represents noise, a repetitive interference signal, an interference signal, or a wireless communication signal not intended for reception.”);
wherein the first period is greater than the second period" (see par. 0044 “the first delay period T1 may be different from the second delay period T2; the first delay period T1 may not divide the second delay period T2; and the second delay period T2 may not divide the first delay period T1. For example, in one embodiment, T1 may be equal to kT2, wherein k may be a non-natural number.” Here if the delay time periods are different, then one is greater equated to the “first time period”).
Claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above because the claims have similar limitations or have been addressed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross as applied to claims 1 and 11, respectfully above.
Regarding Claim 9 Ross teaches the limitations " The communication device of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose the limitation “wherein the first period is a period of a symbol in a preamble defined by a predetermined communication protocol.”
However, Ross does teach “delay period T1 and/or delay period T2 may be equal to a periodicity interval in accordance with one or more wireless communication standards or protocols “ (see par. 0035) and “real-time or non real-time measurements or units may be used to indicate a beginning and/or an ending of a portion of the incoming input used for auto-correlation; or other indications may be used to identify values or portions for auto-correlation, for example, number of bits, bytes, samples, discrete samples, symbols, frames, data items, counting units, or the like.” (Emphasis added). Lastly, Ross explicitly states “T1 may be an integer multiple of a periodicity period in accordance with a wireless communication standard, and T2 may be a non-integer multiple of that periodicity period. In some embodiments, T1 may be an integer multiple of a periodicity period in accordance with a first wireless communication standard, and T2 may be an integer multiple of a periodicity period in accordance with a second, different, wireless communication standard.” In other words, Ross contemplates setting delay periods based on protocol.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set delay periods based on symbols in preamble according to protocol as suggested by Ross, in order to detect periodic interfering signals (see e.g. par. 0032-0033).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above because the claims have similar limitations or have been addressed.
Regarding Claim 10, Ross teaches “The communication device of claim 9, but does not explicitly teach “wherein the predetermined communication protocol is IEEE 802.15.4.”
However, Ross does show the protocol is of “a network, a wireless network, a Local Area Network (LAN), a Wireless LAN (WLAN), devices and/or networks operating in accordance with existing IEEE 802.11, 802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11e, 802.11g, 802.11h, 802.1 .mu.l, 802.11n, 802.16 standards and/or future versions of the above standards, a Personal Area Network (PAN), a Wireless PAN (WPAN), units and/or devices which are part of the above WLAN and/or PAN and/or WPAN networks.” (see par. 0009 and 0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use 802.15.4 as suggested by Ross, in order to allow for determination of whether signals of future protocols were valid (see e.g. par. 0002) and set delay periods according tot eh protocol (see par. 0035).
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above because the claims have similar limitations or have been addressed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8 and 12-18 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID BILODEAU whose telephone number is (571)270-3192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:00am-4:00pm Eastern Standard Time. 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/David Bilodeau/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights