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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 18-20, 28, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sridhar et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Sridhar”, US 2020/0162172) in view of Iscan et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Iscan”, US 2021/0359784).
As to claim 1, Sridhar teaches an apparatus for communication, comprising: a processing system (Figs. 1 and 8, DSP 18, paragraph [0038]) configured to: scramble a first signal to provide a second signal (Fig. 8, scrambling 48, paragraph [0026]), apply probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide bits of a third signal (Fig. 8, shaped bits after performing probabilistic constellation shaping 46, paragraph [0026]), modulate the third signal to provide a fourth signal (Fig. 8, bit-to-symbol mapping 42, paragraph [0082]), and output the fourth signal for transmission (Figs. 1 and 8, transmitter device 14, bit-to-symbol mapping 42).
Sridhar does not expressly teach the transmitter comprising an interface; applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal; and outputting the fourth signal via the interface for transmission.
Iscan further teaches a transmitter comprising: an interface (paragraph [0073]). Iscan further teaches applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal (paragraphs [0005]-[0006]); and outputting the fourth signal via the interface for transmission (paragraph [0073]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the transmitter comprises an interface, and outputs the fourth signal via the interface for transmission in order to perform various forms of couplings and/or communication connections. It would have further been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal in order to further improve communication efficiency.
As to claims 18 and 30, Sridhar further teaches a transmitter configured to transmit the fourth signal (Figs. 1 and 8, transmitter).
Sridhar does not expressly teach that the apparatus is configured as a user equipment or a base station.
Iscan further teaches that the apparatus is configured as a user equipment or a base station (paragraph [0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the apparatus is configured as a user equipment or a base station in order to further improve communication efficiency in mobile communication systems.
As to claim 19, Sridhar teaches a method for communication, comprising: scrambling a first signal to provide a second signal (Fig. 8, scrambling 48, paragraph [0026]), applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide bits of a third signal (Fig. 8, shaped bits after performing probabilistic constellation shaping 46, paragraph [0026]), modulating the third signal to provide a fourth signal (Fig. 8, bit-to-symbol mapping 42, paragraph [0082]), and outputting the fourth signal for transmission (Figs. 1 and 8, transmitter device 14, bit-to-symbol mapping 42).
Sridhar does not expressly teach applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal.
Iscan further teaches applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal (paragraphs [0005]-[0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal in order to further improve communication efficiency.
As to claim 20, Sridhar teaches an apparatus for communication, comprising: a processing system (Figs. 1 and 9, DSP 78, paragraph [0038]) configured to: obtain a first signal (Figs. 1 and 9, receiver, output of symbol processing 86), demodulate the first signal to provide a second signal (Fig. 9, symbol-to-bit demapping 88, paragraph [0029]), apply probabilistic de-shaping to a portion of the second signal to provide a third signal (Fig. 9, inverse shaping 92, paragraph [0031]), and descramble the third signal to provide a fourth signal (Fig. 9, descrambling 94, paragraphs [0032]-[0033]).
Sridhar does not expressly teach an interface; and obtaining the first signal via the interface.
Iscan further teaches an interface; and obtaining the first signal via the interface (paragraph [0073], claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the apparatus for communication comprises an interface, wherein the first signal is obtained via the interface in order to perform various forms of couplings and/or communication connections.
As to claim 28, Sridhar further teaches applying probabilistic de-shaping to shaped bits of the second signal (Figs. 8-9, shaping 46, inverse shaping 92).
Sridhar does not expressly teach applying probabilistic de-shaping to non-uniform bits of the second signal.
Iscan further teaches applying probabilistic shaping to at least a portion of the second signal to provide non-uniform bits of a third signal (paragraphs [0005]-[0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply probabilistic de-shaping to non-uniform bits of the second signal in order to further improve communication efficiency.
Claim(s) 2 and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sridhar in view of Iscan, and further in view of Ma et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Ma”, US 2023/0090492).
As to claim 2, Sridhar and Iscan do not expressly teach that the third signal further comprises uniform bits.
Ma further teaches that the third signal (i.e., the shaped signal) comprises uniform bits (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0073]-[0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the third signal further comprises uniform bits in order to simplify the inverse operation at the receiver.
As to claim 21, Sridhar teaches the second signal comprises shaped systematic bits and unshaped systematic bits (Fig. 8, shaped bits produced by shaping 46 and unshaped scrambled bits).
Sridhar Iscan do not expressly teach that the second signal comprises parity bits.
Ma further teaches a second signal at the output of shaping encoder that comprise shaped systematic bits and unshaped bits or parity bits (Fig. 4, shaping encoder 420, systematic bits and parity bits, QAM modulator 440, paragraph [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the second signal comprises parity bits in order to be used for I/Q sign bits in a system that uses probabilistic shaping.
As to claim 22, Sridhar further teaches that the shaped systematic bits are mapped using QAM modulator (paragraph [0082]).
Sridhar and Iscan do not expressly teach the shaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) amplitudes.
Ma further teaches the shaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) amplitudes (Fig. 4, shaped systematic bits, QAM modulator 440).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the shaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) amplitudes in order to perform QAM modulation/demodulation in a system that uses probabilistic shaping.
As to claim 23, Sridhar and Iscan do not expressly teach the unshaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs.
Ma further teaches the unshaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs (Fig. 4, unshaped systematic bits (or parity bits), QAM modulator 440, paragraph [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the unshaped systematic bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs in order to perform QAM modulation/demodulation in a system that uses probabilistic shaping.
As to claim 24, Sridhar and Iscan do not expressly teach the parity bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs.
Ma further teaches the parity bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs (Fig. 4, unshaped systematic bits (or parity bits), QAM modulator 440, paragraph [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the parity bits are mapped to quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) signs in order to perform QAM modulation/demodulation in a system that uses probabilistic shaping.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-17, 25-27, and 29 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.
Doan et al., US 2021/0243058, abstract, Figs. 6A and 9B
Van Nee, US 10,742,472, abstract, Figs. 7A and 11B
Lefevre et al., US 10,200,231, abstract, Figs. 7-13
Koganei et al., US 2020/0266888, abstract, Fig. 6
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRESHTEH N AGHDAM whose telephone number is (571)272-6037. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:30-7:00 ET.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/FRESHTEH N AGHDAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632 3/17/2026