DETAILED ACTION
This is a Non-Final Office Action addressing U.S. Application No. 18/866,183. Based upon a review of the instant application, the actual filing date is November 15, 2024. Since the instant application was filed after September 16, 2012, the statutory provisions of the America Invents Act ("AIA ") will govern this proceeding.
The instant application is a National Stage Entry of PCT/CN2023/100455 filed June 15, 2023, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/353,084 filed June 17, 2022.
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 § 102
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 1,2,6,7,10,11,12,16,17, and 20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0201316 hereinafter “Zhang”).
Referring to independent claims 1 and 11, Zhang teaches a method and apparatus, the apparatus comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate wirelessly (see figure 1 and ¶ 75); and a processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to perform operations (see figure 1 and ¶ 75) comprising:
receiving a string of input bits (see ¶ 114); and
coding, by the processor, the string of input bits by performing operations comprising (see ¶ 114):
encoding the input bits by a binary convolutional code (BCC) encoder of the processor using a base code rate (see ¶ 114); and
repeating an output of the BCC encoder by a repetition circuit of the processor to result in an effective coding rate of the input bits that is lower than the base code rate (see ¶¶ 114-117).
Referring to dependent claims 2 and 12, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11, and Zhang further teaches wherein the base code rate comprises ½, ⅓, ¼, ⅙ or ⅛ (see ¶ 114).
Referring to dependent claims 6 and 16, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11, and Zhang further teaches wherein the base code rate comprises ½, ⅔, ¾ or ⅚, and wherein the repeating comprises repeating 1 time, 2 times, 3 times, 4 times, 6 times, 8 times, 12 times or 16 times (See ¶¶ 114-117).
Referring to dependent claims 7 and 17, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11, and Zhang further teaches wherein the base code rate comprises ½, ⅓, ¼, ⅙ or ⅛, and wherein the repeating comprises repeating 1 time, 2 times, 3 times, 4 times, 6 times or 8 times (See ¶¶ 114-117).
Referring to dependent claims 10 and 20, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11, and Zhang further teaches wherein the coding of the string of input bits further comprise:
interleaving an output of the repetition circuit by an interleaver of the processor (see item 1810 in figure 18A); and mapping an output of the interleaver by a quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) mapper of the processor (see item 1414 in figure 18A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3-5 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Li (WO 2005/117316).
Referring to dependent claims 3 and 13, Zhang teaches The method of claim 2 and apparatus of claim 12 (as shown above), and Zhang further teaches the repeating of the output of the BCC encoder comprises repeating a codeword generated by the BC3C encoder by a plurality of times (See figure 18A and ¶¶ 114-117), and however the Zhang fails to explicitly disclose the codeword comprises a combination of output data from multiple output branches of the BCC encoder.
Li teaches, a binary convolutional encoder, wherein the output is a codeword comprising a combination of output data from multiple output branches of the BCC encoder (see 1:35-2:15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Zhang with the above teachings of Li. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention would have been motivated to make such modification because Li teaches convolution encoders typically have the disclosed configuration (see 1:24-34).
Referring to dependent claims 4 and 14, Zhang teaches the method of claim 2 and apparatus of claim 12 (as shown above), however fails to teach wherein the repeating of the output of the BCC encoder comprises repeating a respective output data of each output branch of the BCC encoder by a plurality of times to generate a repetition of a first output data of a first output branch of the BCC encoder by the plurality of times followed by a repetition of a second output data of a second output branch of the BCC encoder by the plurality of times.
Li teaches, in an analogous encoder, first output data of a first branch and a second output data of a second branch.
Combining the teachings of Zhang and Li arrives at the claimed limitation as the outputs of the encoder as disclosed by Li would feed into the repeater disclosed by Zhang.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Zhang with the above teachings of Li. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention would have been motivated to make such modification because Li teaches convolution encoders typically have the disclosed configuration (see 1:24-34).
Referring to dependent claims 5 and 15, Zhang teaches the method of claim 2 and apparatus of claim 12, however Zhang fails to teach the repeating of the output of the BCC encoder comprises repeating a combination of output data of multiple output branches of the BCC encoder by a plurality of times such that, in each repetition, the combination of output data comprises a first output data of a first output branch of the BCC encoder followed by a second output data of a second output branch of the BCC encoder.
Li teaches, in an analogous encoder, first output data of a first branch and a second output data of a second branch.
Combining the teachings of Zhang and Li arrives at the claimed limitation as the outputs of the encoder as disclosed by Li would feed into the repeater disclosed by Zhang.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Zhang with the above teachings of Li. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention would have been motivated to make such modification because Li teaches convolution encoders typically have the disclosed configuration (see 1:24-34).
Claim(s) 8,9,18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Zhou et al. (CN 108696295 A “Zhou”).
Referring to dependent claims 8 and 18, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11 (as shown above), and further teaches wherein the coding of the string of input bits comprises coding the string of input bits with a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of quadrature phase-shift keying (QPSK), however Zhang fails to teach a base code rate of 1/4.
(See 4th full paragraph of page 7 of the translation).
Zhou teaches a convolutional encoder with a base rate of 1/4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Zhang with the above teachings of Zhou. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make such modification because Zhou suggests varying the base code rate based on channel quality.
Referring to dependent claims 9 and 19, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 11 (as shown above), and further teaches wherein the coding of the string of input bits comprises coding the string of input bits with a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) of quadrature phase-shift keying (QPSK), however Zhang fails to teach a base code rate of 1/4.
(See 4th full paragraph of page 7 of the translation).
Zhou teaches a convolutional encoder with a base rate of 1/8.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Zhang with the above teachings of Zhou. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make such modification because Zhou suggests varying the base code rate based on channel quality.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0171363 to Sun et al. discloses a BCC encoder with a base code rate.
CA 2475863 C to Lee et al. discloses a convolutional encoder with a plurality of output branches.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERON J SORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-6PM EST.
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 Fuelling can be reached at 571-270-1367. 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.
Signed:
/ERON J SORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights