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 § 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 1-3, 8, 10, 13-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reynolds (US Pat Pub# 2018/0269909) in view of Karri et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0343569).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Reynolds teaches a node device, comprising a transceiver (Figs. 3-4, transmitting and receiving paths etc.); wherein the transceiver is configured to transmit an input signal to an device, such that the device determines, in response to a trigger of the input signal, a reflection mode of the device from at least two reflection modes, wherein the device supports the at least two reflection modes (Section 0021, transmitting/receive inputs of two reflection states of different communication symbols etc.). Reynolds fails to teach an ambient Internet of things device.
Karri teaches a node device, comprising an ambient Internet of things (IoT) device (Sections 0025 and 0030, ambient IoT devices etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an ambient Internet of things device as taught by Reynolds into Karri’s device in order to improve convenience and power consumption.
Regarding claims 2 and 14, the combination including Reynolds teaches wherein the at least two different reflection modes differ in at least one of a communication protocol type of a reflected signal; a packet size of a reflected signal; an information type of a reflected signal; a reflection period of a reflected signal; a data rate of a reflected signal; an operating frequency of a reflected signal; or an operating frequency of the input signal (Section 0021, transmitting/receive inputs of two reflection states of different communication information symbols etc.).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 15, the combination including Reynolds teaches wherein there is one of the ambient IoT device determines, in response to a signal energy detection result of the input signal, the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device from the at least two reflection modes; the ambient IoT device determines, in response to a signal reception demodulation result of the input signal, the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device from the at least two reflection modes; the ambient IoT device determines, in response to a signal frequency of the input signal being a first frequency, a first reflection mode corresponding to the first frequency from the at least two reflection modes as the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device, wherein the first frequency being a frequency of at least one frequency that triggers determining the reflection mode; or the ambient IoT device determines, in response to a transmit power of the input signal corresponding to a first mapping level, a first reflection mode corresponding to the first mapping level from the at least two reflection modes as the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device, wherein the first mapping level is one of at least one mapping level that triggers determining the reflection mode (Section 0021, transmitting/receive inputs of two reflection states of different communication symbols etc.).
Regarding claims 8 and 20, the combination including Reynolds teaches wherein the ambient IoT device determining the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device from the at least two reflection modes comprises selecting a first reflection mode from the at least two reflection modes as the reflection mode of the ambient IoT device; or switching the reflection mode from a second reflection mode to a first reflection mode (Sections 0021-0022, 0037, and 0042, transmitting/receive inputs of two reflection states of different communication symbols and making selections etc.).
Claims 6-7 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reynolds (US Pat Pub# 2018/0269909) in view of Karri et al. (US Pat Pub# 2022/0343569) and further in view of Gronseth et al. (US Pat Pub# 2019/0125303).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Reynolds in view of Karri teaches the limitations in claims 1 and 13. Reynolds and Karri fails to teach an activation signal.
Gronseth teaches wherein the input signal comprises at least one of a power sourcing signal, configured to supply power to the ambient IoT device; a carrier signal, configured to trigger, as an incoming signal, the ambient IoT device to transmit a reflected signal; or an activation signal, configured to activate the ambient IoT device to transmit the reflected signal by a first reflection mode (Sections 0077, 0091, and 0111, transmitting an activation signal and transmitting a reflection signal in response etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an activation signal as taught by Gronseth into an ambient Internet of things device as taught by Reynolds into Karri’s device in order to improve efficiency.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Gronseth further teaches wherein there is one of the power sourcing signal, the carrier signal, and the activation signal are mutually independent; the power sourcing signal and the carrier signal are mutually coupled, and the power sourcing signal and the activation signal are mutually independent; the activation signal and the carrier signal are mutually coupled, and the activation signal and the power sourcing signal are mutually independent; the activation signal and the power sourcing signal are mutually coupled, and the activation signal and the carrier signal are mutually independent; or the power sourcing signal, the carrier signal, and the activation signal are mutually coupled (Sections 0077, 0091, and 0111, activation, resulting carrier signal reflection, and power from the signals are coupled etc.).
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reynolds (US Pat Pub# 2018/0269909).
Regarding claim 9, Reynolds teaches a terminal device, comprising a transceiver and a processor (Figs. 3-4, transmitting and receiving paths with digital logic etc.); wherein the transceiver is configured to receive an input signal (Figs. 3-4, receiving path etc.); and the processor is configured to determine, in response to a trigger of the input signal, a reflection mode from at least two reflection modes (Section 0021, transmitting/receive inputs of two reflection states of different communication symbols etc.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 16-17 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 ANDREW WENDELL whose telephone number is (571)272-0557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM.
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 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.
/ANDREW WENDELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 7/31/2026
Prosecution Insights