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 § 102
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 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, 3-9, 11-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suh et al. (US 2018/0227070 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Suh discloses a wake-up signal detection method (e.g. paragraph [0005]; [0035]; [0037]; and so on), comprising: determining, by a receiving end, a sampling rate (paragraph [0071]; [0089]; and etc., illustrating the determining sampling rate); determining, by the receiving end, a feature sequence set matching the sampling rate from a plurality of feature sequence sets based on the sampling rate (paragraph [0046]-[0056]; [0071]; [0086]; [0089]; and so on, explaining the determination a sequence corresponding to sampling rate); and monitoring, by the receiving end, a wake-up signal based on a first feature sequence in the feature sequence set (figs. 3, 6, 18; paragraph [0044]-[0056]; [0062]-[0071]; [0078]-[0080]; and etc., describing that the monitoring, deciding, and/or decoding a wake-up signal in the sequence of bits).
Regarding claim 9 and 15, the claims include features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding a communication device, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claim 3, 11, and 17, Suh discloses wherein the plurality of feature sequence sets respectively correspond to different sampling rates (paragraph [0044]-[0056]; [0071]; [0078]-[0080]; [0086]; [0089]; and so on).
Regarding claim 4, 12, and 18, Suh discloses wherein the determining, by the receiving end, the sampling rate comprises: determining, by the receiving end, the sampling rate from a sampling rate set (paragraph [0046]-[0056]; [0071]; [0086]; [0089]; and etc.); wherein the sampling rate set comprises a plurality of sampling rates (figs. 3, 6, 18; paragraph [0044]-[0056]; [0062]-[0071]; [0078]-[0080]; [0086]; [0089]; and so on).
Regarding claim 5, Suh discloses wherein the determining, by the receiving end, the sampling rate from the sampling rate set comprises: determining, by the receiving end, the sampling rate from the sampling rate set based on at least one of the following: receiving sensitivity of the receiving end; strength of a signal received by the receiving end; quality of a beacon signal received by the receiving end; or a power consumption requirement (paragraph [0051]; [0005]; [0013]-[0014]; [0035]-[0036]; [0062]; [0071]-[0073]; [0075]-[0076]; [0089]-[0090]).
Regarding claim 6, Suh discloses wherein a sampling rate in the sampling rate set is a divisor or multiple of a sampling rate used for sending a wake-up signal by a sending end (figs. 3, 6, 18; paragraph [0071]-[0074]; and so on).
Regarding claim 7, 13, and 19, Suh further discloses comprising: determining, by the receiving end, the first feature sequence from the feature sequence set based on a feature value (figs. 3, 6, 18; paragraph [0046]-[0056]; [0066]-[0071]; [0080]; [0084]-[0086]; and so on).
Regarding claim 8, 14, and 20, Suh discloses wherein the feature value is determined by the receiving end based on identification information of the receiving end, or indicated by a sending end (figs. 3, 6, 18, and so on).
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.
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.
Claims 2, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suh in view of Wu et al. (US 2010/0128757 A1).
Regarding claim 2, 10, and 16, Suh discloses wherein the feature sequence set comprises a plurality of feature sequences (paragraph [0044]-[0056]; [0071]; [0078]-[0080]; [0086]; [0089]).
Suh does not disclose each feature sequence in the plurality of feature sequences meets a requirement of maximizing a peak-to-side lobe ratio or a requirement of minimizing a maximum sidelobe value.
Wu teaches each feature sequence in the plurality of feature sequences meets a requirement of maximizing a peak-to-side lobe ratio or a requirement of minimizing a maximum sidelobe value (paragraph [0045]-[0047]; [0026]-[0028]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use each feature sequence in the plurality of feature sequences meets a requirement of maximizing a peak-to-side lobe ratio or a requirement of minimizing a maximum sidelobe value as taught by Wu into Suh in order to reduce interference and delay.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights