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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 1-9, in the reply filed on June 25, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to claim 1, it is not clear as to what the limitation “spectrum” at line 7 actually refers to. Therefore, it renders the claim indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 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, 4-5, 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ooi (US 2009/0190646 A1).
As to claim 1, Ooi discloses a multipath system 107 (see figure 2) comprising: an input 201 configured to receive an input signal; an output 202 configured to provide an output signal; at least one summing node 206_N-1 coupled to the output 202; and one or more multipath units (in this instance, the claimed “multipath unit” reads on a combination of 204_N-1, 207_N-1, and 205_N-1; see also paragraph [0040] which discloses “multipath”) coupled to the input 201 and to the at least one summing node 206_N-1, the one or more multipath units configured to apply a delay D 204_N-1 to the input signal 201 and to apply a gain (see “amplitude” in paragraph [0035]) to the input signal using one or more coefficients shaped according to a spectrum (see paragraph [0087]; in this instance, the claimed “a spectrum” reads on “the range of the leak coefficient K” under a broadest reasonable interpretation).
As to claim 4, Ooi discloses that the multipath system further comprises one or more parameter registers including a multipath update interval register. See paragraph [0045] that discloses “Thus, the equalization ability can be adjusted gradually by controlling the speed of updating the filter coefficients as well.”
As to claim 5, Ooi discloses memory, the memory containing the one or more coefficients. See paragraph [0051] that discloses “Further, the channel equalizer 107 shown in FIG. 2 updates the filter coefficients of the FIR filter by the LMS algorithm.” Accordingly, Ooi must inherently disclose a memory for storing the updated filter coefficients.
As to claim 8, Ooi discloses that the one or more multipath units are configured to operate on baseband frequencies (in this instance, down-converted frequencies output from RF-IF converting unit 101 in figure 1 is a low frequency; therefore, it reads on baseband frequencies as claimed).
As to claim 9, Ooi discloses that the input or output are configured to downconvert signals (see RF-IF converting unit 101 in figure 1) from carrier frequencies (see signals received at antenna 100) to DC or low frequencies.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooi in view of Aue (US 2002/0051486 A1).
As to claim 6, Ooi fails to disclose at least one switching device configured to selectively activate and deactivate the one or more multipath units. Aue discloses at least one switching device configured to selectively activate and deactivate one or more multipath units (see paragraph [0020] that discloses “In known processes, therefore, one of two chronologically adjacent RAKE fingers is switched off when a previously determined minimal time difference between the RAKE fingers has not been met due to the individual fine synchronization”; in this instance the claimed “one or more multipath units” reads on adjacent RAKE fingers in Aue). Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the above teaching of Aue to Ooi, in order to yield predictable results such as reducing power consumption.
As to claim 7, the combination of Ooi and Aue would result the claimed limitations of a plurality of switching devices (see Aue, paragraph [0020] that discloses “In known processes, therefore, one of two chronologically adjacent RAKE fingers is switched off when a previously determined minimal time difference between the RAKE fingers has not been met due to the individual fine synchronization), each multipath unit of the one or more multipath units (see plurality of multipath units in figure 2 of Ooi) coupled to a respective switching device of the plurality of switching devices, each respective switching device configured to selectively activate and deactivate at least one multipath unit of the one or more multipath units (see Aue, paragraph [0020] that discloses “In known processes, therefore, one of two chronologically adjacent RAKE fingers is switched off when a previously determined minimal time difference between the RAKE fingers has not been met due to the individual fine synchronization).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 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.
As to claims 2-3, the prior art of record fail to disclose that each multipath unit of the one or more multipath units further comprises: a fractional delay component configured receive the input signal and to apply the delay to the input signal; a multipath gain coefficient register coupled to a first multiplier and configured to provide at least one gain coefficient to the first multiplier; a filter configured to generate at least one filter coefficient and provide the at least one filter coefficient to the first multiplier; a second multiplier coupled to the first multiplier, the fractional delay component, and the output; and an output configured to provide an output signal based on the delay, the at least one gain coefficient, and the at least one filter coefficient.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fukawa (CA 2,151,284); Yamamoto (WO 2006/103922 A1); Parvathanathan (WO 03/015364 A1); CN 112822133 A disclose multipath systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN THANH VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7901. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 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, Jeanette J Parker can be reached at (571) 270-3647. 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.
/NGUYEN T VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights