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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in reply to the Applicant’s amendments filed on 14 July 2026.
Claims 1-16 have been amended.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-16 have been amended to overcome the claim objection. The objections to claims 2 and 5 are hereby withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 14 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-14 of the Applicant’s Response, applicant argues that Mundarath does not disclose that the signal is source from the physical layer (PHY). Mundarath disclose the high PAPR signal which is different from OFDM PHY signal that is already based on complex low PAPR signal. Furthermore, Mundarath does not identify OFDM processing or any OFDM specific structure. The mere IQ baseband signal does not inherently imply OFDM.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Mundarath (Fig. 2, Fig. 7, paragraph [0013, 0021, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038]) discloses the IQ modulation commonly used for multi carrier communication system which commonly used for various OFDM modulations in PHY layer below the MAC layer shown in Kahn (Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B, paragraph [0048, 0046]) for illustration purpose. Further, Mundarath discloses the reduction of crest factor for I/Q modulation signal (complex signal) which implicitly have IQ high and low peaks illustrated by the Applicant’s specification (Fig. 3, Fig. 4). Therefore, Mundarath in view of Kahn disclose the PHY layer OFDM signal for the generation of low PAPR baseband signal using the CRF.
Applicant further argues that Mundarth disclose the interpolation simply produce additional sample points so that signal peaks may be observed with greater resolution which is different from interpolated signal is generated with pre-determined peak regrowth using pre-determined peak regrowth and n-factor of interpolation
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Mundarath (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038, 0042]) discloses the localized interpolation and upsampling (n-factor) around selected peaks with predetermined threshold to mitigate peak regrowth which corresponds to interpolation using upsampling to higher data rate of Applicant’s specification (Fig. 12, paragraph [0120]).
Applicant further argues that Mundarth merely disclose conventional peak cancellation process which does not corresponds to pre-determined peak regrowth characteristic of an interpolated signal. Also Mundarath does not disclose “modified n-factor signal” as recited claims. Furthermore, Mundarath interpolation followed by peak reduction which fail to disclose decimation is performed on “modified n-factor signal” based pre-determined peak regrowth. Khan merely disclose the communication system employing different modulation scheme and it does not suggest modifying Mundarath’s CFR. Also examiner’s rationale to use “common modulation scheme and standard communication structure” is insufficient. Also Hou does not teach DUC with respect to CFR process. Therefore, combination of Mnarath, Khan and Hou fail to teach the features of claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Mundarath (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0033, 0037, 0038, 0042]) discloses the localized interpolation and upsampling (n-factor) of input signal (modified n-factor signal) around selected peaks with predetermined threshold to mitigate peak regrowth. Kahn (Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B, paragraph [0006, 0042, 0046]) further disclose the I/Q baseband signal crest factor reduction to reduce the PAPR ratio of the signal and supporting commonly known modulation schemes including OFDM in PHY layer (signal modulation and transmission layer) below MAC layer. Further, Hou disclose (Fig. 7, paragraph [0008, 0073]) the second CFR at higher sampling rate using digital up-conversion (DUC) to further reduce the PAPR while reducing the complexity. Therefore, combining teaching of Mundarath, Khan, and Hou disclosed the claimed limitation of claim 1.
Applicant further argues that Feng teaches generic CORDIC algorithm which does not tied to CFR framework.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Feng (Fig. 2 (210), paragraph [0013]) discloses the CFR process using CORDIC algorithm to further enhance the peak detection. Therefore, Feng teaches the enhancement of the Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou.
Applicant further argues that Mundarath and Feng does not disclose “generate peak search window associated with magnitude and phase of the received signal” of claims 3 and 13.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Mundarath (Fig. 2 (271), paragraph [0013]) disclose the adjusting the peak amplitude and phase of peak search window and Feng (Fig. 2 (210), paragraph [0014]) disclose the peak detection in given time window (peak search window) using CORDIC algorithm. Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Feng disclosed claimed limitation of claims 3 and 13.
Applicant further argues that Mundarath and Feng does not disclose “peak cancellation technique that provides multiplexing of the received signal and generate PSW” of claims 4 and 14.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Mundarath (Fig. 2 (234), paragraph [0026]) disclose the peak cancel through PSW for multiplexing received signal from previous steps and Feng (Feng - Fig. 2 (230), paragraph [0011]) disclose the peak cancellation for CORDIC generated signal multiplexed with delayed signal. Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Feng disclosed claimed limitation of claims 4 and 14.
Applicant further argues that Gubeskys is generic implementation of FIR filter which is not directed to peak regrowth in CFR system. Also does not disclose the the AIR technique uses FIR based interpolation of claims 5 and 6.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Gubeskys (Fig. 2, paragraph [0075, 1026]) disclose the multi stage CFR and interpolation using FIR filter. Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Gubeskys disclosed claimed limitation of claims 5 and 6.
Applicant further argues that Shih merely disclose generating peak windows at different sampling rate and does not teach or suggest Mundarath to incorporate down sampler for block based CFR peak collection. Also Mundarath does not disclose any explicitly down-sampling operation of claim 7.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Shih (Fig. 16, paragraph [0074, 0005]) disclose the down-sampler to generate different sample rate domain peak windows for CFR. Further, Mundarath (paragraph [0033]) further disclose the down sampled domain (implicitly decimated by down-sampling factor similar to Shih) for efficient peak detection. Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Shih disclosed claimed limitation of claim 7.
Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Shih disclosed claimed limitation of claim 7.
Applicant further argues that Mundarath merely disclose conventional peak cancellation wherein cancellation waveform or pulse is subtracted from original signal to reduce PAPR. This subtraction operation is not down-sampler as recited in claim 8.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Shih (Fig. 16, paragraph [0074, 0005]) disclose the down-sampler to generate different sample rate domain peak windows for CFR. Further, Mundarath (Fig. 2 (272), Fig. 4 (420), paragraph [0026, 0033. 0041]) further disclose the down sampled domain (implicitly decimated by down-sampling factor similar to Shih) for efficient peak detection which then subtracted to reduced PAPR. Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Shih disclosed claimed limitation of claim 8.
Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Shih disclosed claimed limitation of claim 8.
Applicant further argues that Wang merely disclose recognizing both positive and negative signal excursion and employs corresponding window functions which does not recites “the processor configured with window crest factor reduction technique to sanitize the negated peak associated with received signal” of claim 9.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Wang (Fig. 2, paragraph [0003, 0080, 0078]) disclose the peak windowing crest factor reduction for no peaks in positive and negative window functions (negated) to reduce the signal peak to average ration of CFR. Therefore, Wang disclose the claimed limitation of claim 9.
Applicant further argues that combined teaching of Mundarath, Khan, Hou, and Wang does not disclose the dual port ROM for storing sanitized negate peak recited in claim 10.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s arguments, because Wang (Fig. 2, paragraph [0003, 0080, 0078, 0129]) disclose the peak windowing crest factor reduction for no peaks in positive and negative window functions (negated) to reduce the signal peak to average ration of CFR and storing samples (implicitly including sanitized negate peaks) implemented in corresponding memory resources including types on ROMs which implicitly includes various number of connection ports (single, dual, multiple – for increased data channels for faster data access)). Mundarath (Fig. 2, paragraph [0021, 0067, 0068]) further disclose the samples stored in local buffers/memories including ROMs implicitly have different number of ports for fast data access.
Therefore, combined teachings of Mundarath and Wang disclosed claimed limitation of claim 10.
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 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 of this title, 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, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. No. 20140044215 to Mundarath et al. in further view of U.S. PGPub. No. 20200068570 to Khan et al. and U.S. PGPub. No. 20210176107 to Hou et al.
As to Claims 1, 11, and 16, Mundarath discloses a crest factor reduction (CFR) system with restricted peak regrowth, method, and non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, paragraph [0004, 0013, 0020]):
a processor (Fig. 2 (201), paragraph [0020, 0067]);
a memory operatively coupled with processor, wherein said memory store instruction, which when executed by the processor, cause processor to (Fig. 2, paragraph [0020, 0067], having computer readable medium having instructions to execute the system):
receive a signal of a base station, wherein the received signal is based on a complex low peak to average power ratio (PAPR) signal (Fig. 2, Fig. 7, paragraph [0013, 0021, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038], where the vector signal processor receives the IQ baseband signals (complex signal) which implicitly have IQ high and low peaks illustrated by the Applicant’s specification (Fig. 3, Fig. 4) for CFR processing (mitigate high peak to average power ratio) in base station system);
interpolate the received signal to an n-factor to generate an interpolated signal with a pre-determined peak regrowth (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038, 0042], where localized interpolation and upsampling (n-factor) around selected peaks with predetermined threshold to mitigate peak regrowth which corresponds to interpolation using upsampling to higher data rate of Applicant’s specification (Fig. 12, paragraph [0120]);
generate one or more pulses to negate a peak associated with pre-determined peak regrowth of the received signal to generate a modified n-factor signal (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0033, 0037, 0038, 0042], where the cancellation pulse is generate to mitigate peak regrowth which corresponds to interpolation);
decimate the modified n-factor signal to generate a PAPR diminished signal and generate the CFR with the restricted peak regrowth (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0033, 0037, 0038, 0042], where CFR generates the mitigated peak regrowth of interpolated samples).
Mundarath disclose all of the subject matter as described above for the IQ modulation commonly used for multi carrier communication system (Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0022, 0026, 0033, 0037, 0038, 0042]) except for signal from a Physical layer (PHY) equipped with orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM).
However, it is well known art to generate communication signals using various modulations (including OFDM) controlled various layers (MAC, PHY, RRC, etc.) within the communication system. Also Khan in the same field of endeavor teaches the common transmitter generating signals with different modulation schemes including I/Q modulation in orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) in PHY layer below the MAC layer of the communication system (Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B, paragraph [0006, 0042, 0046, 0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use common modulation scheme and standard communication structures (layers) as taught by Khan to modify the system and method of Mundarath to support various wireless communication standards.
Mundarath in view of Khan disclose all of the subject matter as described above (Mundarath - Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0021, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038]) (Kahn - Fig. 2A, paragraph [0006, 0042, 0046]) except for digital up-conversion after CFR.
However, Hou in the same field of endeavor teaches the second CFR at higher sampling rate using digital up-conversion (DUC) to further reduce the PAPR while reducing the complexity (Fig. 7, paragraph [0008, 0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use digital up-conversion to execute the high sampling rate CFR as taught by Hou to modify the system and method of Mundarath in view of Khan to improve the communication system with reduced PAPR complexity (Hou – paragraph [0008]).
Claims 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. No. 20140044215 to Mundarath et al., U.S. PGPub. No. 20200068570 to Khan et al. and U.S. PGPub. No. 20210176107 to Hou et al. in further view of U.S. PGPub. No. 20150349994 to Feng.
As to Claims 2 and 12, Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou discloses all of the subject matter of CFR with restricted peak regrowth with peak detection (Mundarath - Fig. 2 (233), paragraph [0013, 0021, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038])) except for the coordinate rotation digital computer (CORDIC) technique to determine a magnitude and a phase association with the received signal.
However, Feng in the same field of endeavor teaches the peak detection/extraction using the Coordinate Rotational Digital Computer (CORDIC) algorithm to calculate the magnitude and phase of the input signal (Fig. 2 (210), paragraph [0011, 0013, 0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use the various algorithms for CFR including CORDIC as taught by Feng to modify the system and method of Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou to improve/enhance the communication system with various CFR algorithms.
As to Claims 3 and 13, Mundarath in view of Khan, Hou, and Feng further disclose the system and method wherein to generate a peak search window (PSW) associated with the magnitude and the phase of the received signal (Mundarath - Fig. 2 (271), paragraph [0013], adjust the peak amplitude and phase of peak search window) (Feng - Fig. 2 (210), paragraph [0011, 0013, 0014], peak detection in given time window (peak search window)). The suggestion/motivation is the same as that used in the rejection for claims 2 and 12.
As to Claims 4 and 14, Mundarath in view of Khan, Hou, and Feng further disclose the system and method wherein configured with peak cancellation (PC) technique that provides multiplexing the received signal and generates the PSW (Mundarath - Fig. 2 (234), paragraph [0026], where the peak cancel through PSW for received signal from previous steps) (Feng - Fig. 2 (230), paragraph [0011, 0013, 0014], peak cancellation for CORDIC generated signal). The suggestion/motivation is the same as that used in the rejection for claims 2 and 12.
Claims 5, 6, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. No. 20140044215 to Mundarath et al., U.S. PGPub. No. 20200068570 to Khan et al. and U.S. PGPub. No. 20210176107 to Hou et al. in further view of U.S. PGPub. No. 20140269987 to Gubeskys et al.
As to Claims 5 and 15, Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou discloses all of the subject matter of CFR receiving signal with the pre-determined peak regrowth with an interpolation processing technique (Mundarath - Fig. 2, paragraph [0013, 0021, 0022, 0026, 0037, 0038])) except for the advance interpolation (use Finite Impulse Response).
However, Gubeskys in the same field of endeavor teaches the multi stage CFR and interpolation module implemented with finite impulse response (FIR) filter (Fig. 2, paragraph [0075, 1026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention use the various filters for CFR as taught by Gubeskys to modify the system and method of Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou to improve/enhance the communication system with lower PAPR and minimum distortion overall (Gubeskys – paragraph [0052]).
As to Claim 6, Mundarath in view of Khan, Hou, and Gubeskys further disclose the system and method wherein AIR technique uses a Finite Impulse Response (FIR) based interpolator (Gubeskys - Fig. 2, paragraph [0075, 1026]). The suggestion/motivation is the same as that used in the rejection for claim 5.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. No. 20140044215 to Mundarath et al., U.S. PGPub. No. 20200068570 to Khan et al. and U.S. PGPub. No. 20210176107 to Hou et al. in further view of WIPO Pub. No. 2021087533 to Shih.
As to Claim 7, Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou discloses all of the subject matter of block based CFR processing in reduced complexity in baches in down-sampled domain for collection of peaks (Mundarath - Fig. 2, paragraph [0033] – where CFR processing including down sampled domain (implicitly reducing (decimating) by down-sampling factor) for efficient peak detection except for the down sampler.
However, Shih in the same field of endeavor teaches the down-sampler to generate different sample rate domain peak windows (Fig. 16, paragraph [0074, 0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use down sampler for multi-rate peak detection as taught by Shih to modify the system of Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou to improve/enhance the communication system with flexible power consumption and silicon area of the systems (Shih – paragraph [0074]).
As to Claim 8, Mundarath in view of Khan, Hou, and Shih further disclose the system wherein the down sampler subtracts the modified n-factor signal from the received signal for generation of the PAPR diminished signal (Mundarath - Fig. 2 (272), Fig. 4 (420), paragraph [0026, 0033, 0041], where the down sampled domain (implicitly decimated by down-sampling factor similar to Shih) for efficient peak detection which then subtracted to reduced PAPR) (Shih - Fig. 16, paragraph [0074, 0005], where the down-sampler to generate different sample rate domain peak windows for CFR). The suggestion/motivation is the same as that used in the rejection for claim 7.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. PGPub. No. 20140044215 to Mundarath et al., U.S. PGPub. No. 20200068570 to Khan et al. and U.S. PGPub. No. 20210176107 to Hou et al. in further view of U.S. PGPub. No. 20220217031 to Wang et al.
As to Claim 9, Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou discloses all of the subject matter of using CFR algorithm with peak search window and peak filter to reduce the peak power of the received signal (Mundarath - Fig. 2, paragraph [0004, 0023])) except for the window crest factor reduction to sanitize negated peak.
However, Wang in the same field of endeavor teaches the peak windowing crest factor reduction for no peaks in positive and negative window functions (negated) to reduce the signal peak to average ration of CFR (Fig. 2, paragraph [0003,0080, 0078]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the peak windowing crest factor reduction as taught by Wang to modify the system of Mundarath in view of Khan and Hou to improve/enhance the communication system with improved performance and reduced complexity (Wang – paragraph [0004]).
As to Claim 10, Mundarath in view of Khan, Hou, and Wang further disclose the system wherein the dual port read only memory (DPROM) to store the sanitized negate peak (Mundarath - Fig. 2, paragraph [0021, 0067, 0068], where samples stored in local buffers/memories including ROM implicitly have different number of ports for fast data access) (Wang - Fig. 2, paragraph [0003, 0080, 0078, 0129], where the peak windowing crest factor reduction for no peaks in positive and negative window functions (negated) to reduce the signal peak to average ratio of CFR and storing samples (implicitly including sanitized negate peaks) implemented in corresponding memory resources including types on ROMs which implicitly includes various number of connection ports (single, dual, multiple – for increased data channels for faster data access)). The suggestion/motivation is the same as that used in the rejection for claim 9.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNG S AHN whose telephone number is (571)270-3706. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9-6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hannah Wang can be reached on 571-272-9018. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SUNG S AHN/Examiner, Art Unit 2631 (571)-270-3706
sung.ahn@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights