CTFR 18/836,693 CTFR 80930 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that in paragraphs [0022]-[0026], Khan et al. Khan et al. (US 20180109150 A1) does not disclose "receiving a first message that includes information indicative of a time division duplex configuration, the time division duplex configuration indicating a temporal arrangement of energy transmission resources and information reception resources" because this describes the base station's internal optimization process, not a message transmitted to the device containing TDD configuration information, and to the base station's internal scheduling decisions regarding antenna selection and power levels, not to transmitting configuration information to the energy receiver device, as recited in the independent claims. As applicant states, Khan discloses “the scheduling includes frames in which frequency and/or time slots are allocated for downlink from the base station to the devices and uplink transmission from the devices to the base station” and “ one or more of the sequence of frames includes UL training (aTR), downlink (DL) WET, and uplink (UL) WIT, internet of things (IoT) device, a user equipment (UE)) may receive one or more energy. The claim language states a first message that includes information indicative of a time division configuration, the time division duplex configuration indicating a temporal arrangement of energy reception resources and information transmission resources. Instant specification discloses “For example, the described techniques provide for the indication of a TDD configuration (e.g., framework) for wireless energy transfer (WET) and wireless information transfer (WIT) between an energy transmitter device and an energy receiver device” Specification further states examples of claimed first message as “energy reception and information transmission resources for the energy receiver device , energy transmission and information reception resources for the energy transmitter device ”. See paragraph [0004]. Thus, Khan’s “ scheduling includes frames in which frequency and/or time slots (i.e. time resources for energy (WET) or information transfer (WIT)) are allocated for downlink from the base station to the devices and uplink transmission from the devices to the base station ” and “TDD mode of operation including a downlink ..WET phase and an uplink …WIT phase and uplink WET signals” reads on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed limitation, contrary to applicant’s arguments. Scheduled frames are inherently transmitted. See paragraph [0074] for additional support “wireless signals communicated between communicated between the base station and the device include time and/or frequency blocks within frames, and WET and WIT signals are scheduled within the time and/or frequency blocks of the frames”. Thus, rejection of all previously rejected claims is maintained and is made final hereinafter . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by previously cited Khan et al. (US 20180109150 A1) , hereinafter, Khan . Regarding claim 1: Khan discloses a method for wireless communication at an energy receiver device (Fig. 3, one of units 360) , comprising: receiving a first message that includes information indicative of a time division duplex configuration for energy reception and information transmission (Paragraph [0021], scheduling frame from BS to plurality of devices with time slots allocated to downlink energy reception and uplink information transmission is claimed receiving a first message), the time division duplex configuration indicating a temporal arrangement of energy reception resources and information transmission resources (Paragraphs [0021]-[0026], time slots for downlink energy reception and uplink information transmission in TDD frames indicate a temporal arrangement of energy reception resources and information transmission resources, as claimed); receiving one or more energy signals during the energy reception resources in accordance with the time division duplex configuration, the one or more energy signals providing energy to the energy receiver device (Paragraphs [0021]- [0026], in TDD mode, one or more downlink WET signals are received by energy harvesting device/s 360 from the BS, i.e. the one or more energy signals providing energy to the energy receiver device ); and transmitting one or more second messages during the information transmission resources in accordance with the time division duplex configuration (Paragraphs [0023]-[0026], uplink wireless information transfer (WIT) to the BS in TDD mode is claimed transmitting one or more second messages). Regarding claim 15: A method for wireless communication at an energy transmitter device (Fig. 3, BS 110), comprising: transmitting a first message that includes information indicative of a time division duplex configuration for energy transmission and information reception (Paragraph [0021], scheduling frame from BS to plurality of devices with time slots allocated to downlink energy transmission and uplink information reception is claimed transmitting a first message), the time division duplex configuration indicating a temporal arrangement of energy transmission resources and information reception resources( Paragraphs [0021]-[0026], time slots for downlink energy transmission and uplink information reception in TDD frames indicate a temporal arrangement of energy reception resources and information transmission resources, as claimed); transmitting one or more energy signals during the energy transmission resources in accordance with the time division duplex configuration, the one or more energy signals providing energy to an energy receiver device (Paragraphs [0021]- [0026], in TDD mode, one or more downlink WET signals are transmitted to energy harvesting device/s 360 (claimed energy receiver device) from the BS); and receiving one or more second messages during the information reception resources in accordance with the time division duplex configuration (Paragraphs [0023]-[0026], uplink wireless information transfer (WIT) to the BS in TDD mode is claimed receiving one or more second messages) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan in view of previously cited Su et al. (US 11736213 B2) , hereinafter, Su . Regarding claim 2: Khan discloses identifying that the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration includes a combination of energy reception resources, information transmission resources (Paragraphs [0021]-[0026]). However, Khan fails to explicitly disclose flexible resources, wherein the flexible resources are able to be used for either energy reception or information transmission. However, Su discloses the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration includes flexible resources, wherein the flexible resources are able to be used for either energy reception or information transmission (Column 43, lines 3-11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration of Khan includes flexible resources as disclosed by Su. It would have been obvious because allocating flexible resources improves system performance (Column 43, lines 3-11). Regarding claim 16: Khan discloses identifying that the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration includes a combination of energy transmission resources, information reception resources (Paragraphs [0021]-[0026]). However, Khan fails to explicitly disclose flexible resources, wherein the flexible resources are able to be used for either energy reception or information transmission. However, Su discloses the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration includes flexible resources, wherein the flexible resources are able to be used for either energy transmission or information reception (Column 43, lines 3-11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the temporal arrangement indicated by the time division duplex configuration of Khan includes flexible resources as disclosed by Su. It would have been obvious because allocating flexible resources improves system performance (Column 43, lines 3-11) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan in view of previously cited Faxer et al. (US 20220303108 A1) , hereinafter, Faxer . Regarding claim 4: Khan discloses energy transmitter device that is in communication with the energy receiver device, but fails to explicitly disclose, wherein the time division duplex configuration is cell-specific to an energy transmitter device that is in communication with the energy receiver device. However, Faxer is discloses the time division duplex configuration is cell-specific to a transmitter device that is in communication with a receiver device (Paragraphs [0043], [0051], [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Khan’s energy transmitter device that is in communication with the energy receiver device would have wherein the time division duplex configuration is cell-specific to the transmitter device that is in communication with the receiver device as disclosed by Faxer. It would have been obvious because cell-specific TDD configurations enables optimized adjustments of time slots. Regarding claim 18: Claim 18 is rejected as being obvious over Khan in view of Faxer based on a rationale similar to the one used to reject claim 4 above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 29 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan in view of previously cited Malik et al. (US 20150303741 A1) , hereinafter, Malik . Regarding claim 29: Claim 29 is rejected as being obvious over Khan based on a rationale similar to the one used to reject claim 1 above. Khan fails to explicitly disclose a processor; memory coupled with the processor; and instructions stored in the memory and executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to perform claimed limitations. However, Malik discloses a processor; memory coupled with the processor; and instructions stored in the memory and executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to perform functions (Paragraphs [0091]-[0094]). Regarding claim 30: Claim 30 is rejected as being obvious over Khan based on a rationale similar to the one used to reject claim 15 above. Khan fails to explicitly disclose a processor; memory coupled with the processor; and instructions stored in the memory and executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to perform claimed limitations. However, Malik discloses a processor; memory coupled with the processor; and instructions stored in the memory and executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to perform functions (Paragraphs [0091]-[0094[]) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 3, 5-14, 17, 19-28 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 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINEETA S PANWALKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8561. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-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, David C. Payne can be reached at 571-272-3024. 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. /VINEETA S PANWALKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 2 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 3 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 4 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 5 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 6 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 7 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 8 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 9 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 10 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 11 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 12 Art Unit: 2635 Application/Control Number: 18/836,693 Page 13 Art Unit: 2635
Prosecution Insights