DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. The instant application is a continuation filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) of PCT/CN2022/080389, filed March 11, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/09/2024 has been found to be in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
5. The drawings were received on 9/09/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
6. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: COMMUNICATION METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DISTRIBUTED TONE MAPPING ON A RESOURCE UNIT.
7. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
10. Claims 1-7 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0288769 A1 to Yang et al. (hereinafter “Yang1”).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang1 discloses a communication method, comprising:
performing distributed tone mapping on a first resource unit (RU) (Yang1: [0006-0007] – corresponds to performing tone mapping on an RU distributed across a bandwidth.).
Regarding Claim 2, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
constructing a second RU by using tone indexes obtained by the distributed tone mapping (Yang1: [0009-0015] – interpreted to correspond to using distributed tones by mapping a tone mapping vector (comprising a tone index) to one or more of the plurality of RUs based on the first RU.).
Regarding Claim 3, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein performing the distributed tone mapping on the first RU comprises:
mapping first tone indexes of the first RU to second tone indexes in a first pattern (Yang1: [0111], [0144-0145] – a tone plan is a tone pattern comprising a tone mapping that includes a tone index (see [0009-0015]), wherein “…a first tone plan 501 includes RUs that span 26 tones…”);
mapping the second tone indexes to third tone indexes in a second pattern (Yang1: [0111] – “…a second tone plan 502 includes RUs that span 52 tones…”);
mapping the third tone indexes to fourth tone indexes in a third pattern (Yang1: [0111] – “…a third tone plan 503 includes RUs that span 106 tones…”); and
mapping the fourth tone indexes to fifth tone indexes in a fourth pattern (Yang1: [0111] – “…and a fourth tone plan 504 includes an RU that spans 242 tones.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the second pattern comprises a uniform mapping pattern (Yang1: [0211], [0214-0215] – corresponds to a tone plan in which a tone mapping distance (DTM) wherein the set of tones are spaced 13 tones apart.).
Regarding Claim 5, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the uniform mapping pattern comprises:
performing mapping at intervals of tone indexes whose quantity is a mapping distance (Yang1: [0211], [0214-0215] – corresponds to a tone plan in which a tone mapping distance (DTM) wherein the set of tones are spaced 13 tones apart.).
Regarding Claim 6, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the mapping distance is related to a tone mapping bandwidth (Yang1: [0008] – “…an ordering of the tones of the sets of non-contiguous tones distributed across the second frequency bandwidth may be different than an ordering of the tones of the unique sets of contiguous tones corresponding to the plurality of RUs”; [0214-0215] – the DTM is based on, for example, 80MHz frequency spectrum (bandwidth).).
Regarding Claim 7, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the mapping distance is determined based on a total quantity of tones within the tone mapping bandwidth that constitute the first RU and a size of the first RU (Yang1: [0215-0217] – the DTM is considered in part by the number of tones in a bandwidth for separation by the tone mapping distance, which requires the number of RUs per the bandwidth.).
Regarding Claim 17, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first RU comprises at least one of a physical RU or a physical MRU (Yang1: [0006] – corresponds to a resource unit (RU) of a plurality of RUs (MRUs) operable to transmit/receive on the physical layer.).
Regarding Claim 18, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
performing channel estimation by using a four-fold extremely high throughput long training field (4x EHT LTF) (Yang1: [0086-0089] – the legacy preamble of the PPDU is used for channel estimation; [0094-0097] – the PPDU is an EHT PPDU comprising a plurality of fields including EHT-LTF; and [0129-0130] – and the one or more fields of the EHT are duplicated N=4 times over an 80 MHz bandwidth.).
Claims 19 and 20, directed to apparatus embodiments of claim 1, recite similar features as claim 1, and are therefore rejected upon the same grounds as claim 1. Please see above rejection of claim 1. Yang1 discloses the apparatus as a communication device comprising a processor and memory in at least Figures 6 and 7A. Yang1 further discloses the chip as a chip or system on chip (SoC) in at least [0116].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
14. 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.
15. Claims 8, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang1 in view of United States Patent Application Publication 2016/0088599 A1 to Yang et al. (hereinafter “Yang2”).
Regarding Claim 8, Yang1 discloses the method according to claim 3, but does not expressly disclose wherein the distributed tone mapping comprises one-shot distributed tone mapping.
However, this feature cannot be considered new or novel in the presence of Yang1. Yang2 is similarly concerned with distributed tone mapping (Yang2: [0003]). Yang2 discloses the distributed tone mapping comprises one-shot distributed tone mapping (Yang2: [0061] – “Logical mapping may be used to connect resource tone allocation with actual physical tones for transmission. In logical mapping, the mapped, distributed set of physical tone indices may be spread over at least some minimum bandwidth for purposes of having a power advantage.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the tone mapping of Yang1 in view of the tone mapping of Yang2 to include one-shot distributed tone mapping for the reasons of reducing bottlenecking in receiver processing delay (Yang2: [0061]).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Yang1 and Yang2 discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein Yang2 discloses the one-shot distributed tone mapping is configured to map a physical tone within a subchannel where a logical RU allocation mode is located to a logical tone within an OFDMA PPDU bandwidth (Yang2: [0061], [0067] – corresponds to mapping a physical tone with a logical tone, the logical tone being used for resource tone allocation, and the logical mapping can be performed on an OFDMA bandwidth.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the tone mapping of Yang1 in view of the tone mapping of Yang2 to include one-shot distributed tone mapping for the reasons of reducing bottlenecking in receiver processing delay (Yang2: [0061]).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Yang1 and Yang2 discloses the method according to claim 8, wherein Yang1 further discloses the first RU comprises an RU 26 (Yang1: [0009-0016] – corresponds to the RU26.).
Allowable Subject Matter
16. Claims 10 and 12-16 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
17. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV whose telephone number is (571)270-7163. The examiner can normally be reached M, T, R, F 5:00 AM-5:00 PM, W 5:00 AM-3:00 PM (EDT).
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
BENJAMIN H. ELLIOTT IV
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2474
/BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474 July 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights