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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 7, 12, 14-16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn et al. (US 20220407758 A1), hereinafter, Horn.
Regarding claim 1:
Horn discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a transmitting device (Figs. 1 and 2, baste station 110, paragraph [0050]), comprising:
one or more memories (Fig. 2, memory 242; paragraph [0057]); and
one or more processors (Fig. 2, processor 240; paragraph [0057]) coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more memories comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to (Paragraph [0058]):
determine a set of filler tones based at least in part on a set of signals intended for one of Internet of Things (IoT) device (Paragraph [0123], BS determines tone reservation applied to subcarriers (claimed filler tones) based on amount of data buffered for transmission to a UE i.e. set of signals intended for an IoT device; See Paragraph [0043]), wherein the set of filler tones are determined to maintain a peak energy, an average power, a peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR), or a combination thereof (Paragraphs [0124]-[0126], threshold PAPR is claimed maintaining PAPR); and
transmit, in a first time period and using a first antenna group, the set of signals to the IoT device in combination with the set of filler tones (Paragraphs [0050], [0051], [0126]).
Thus, Horn discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose the set of signals intended for and transmitted to a set of IoT devices.
However, Horn discloses that the base station (claimed transmitting device) communicates data (set of signals) with one or more UEs (i.e. a set of IoT devices) (Paragraph [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Horn’s teaching of communicating data with one or more UE would result in the claimed invention of the set of signals intended for and transmitted to a set of IoT devices. It would have been obvious because the communication between multiple entities allows for the transmitting device to communicate with a plurality of devices in its network.
Regarding claim 2:
Horn further discloses the apparatus, wherein the set of filler tones comprise nonce resource elements (Paragraph [0126], the reserved tones do not carry modulated data, i.e. the set of filler tones comprise nonce resource elements)
Regarding 3:
Horn further discloses the apparatus, wherein the set of signals for the IoT device is fed to feedback circuitry to calculate the set of filler tones (Fig. 6; modulated data to be transmitted (claimed set of data) is fed to circuitry including feedback loop 610 (claimed feedback circuitry) to calculate the set of filter tones; paragraphs [0121]-[0126]).
Further, Horn discloses that the base station (claimed transmitting device) communicates data (set of signals) with one or more UEs (i.e. a set of IoT devices) (Paragraph [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Horn’s teaching of communicating data with one or more UE would result in the claimed invention of the set of signals intended for and transmitted to a set of IoT devices. It would have been obvious because the communication between multiple entities allows for the transmitting device to communicate with a plurality of devices in its network.
Regarding 7:
Horn discloses the apparatus, wherein the set of filler tones are non-contiguous within a bandwidth used for the IoT device, contiguous within the bandwidth, or a combination thereof (Inherently, the bandwidth occupied is either contiguous or non-contiguous).
Further, Horn discloses that the base station (claimed transmitting device) communicates data (set of signals) with one or more UEs (i.e. a set of IoT devices) (Paragraph [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Horn’s teaching of communicating data with one or more UE would result in the claimed invention of the set of signals intended for and transmitted to a set of IoT devices. It would have been obvious because the communication between multiple entities allows for the transmitting device to communicate with a plurality of devices in its network.
Regarding 12:
Horn discloses the apparatus wherein the set of filler tones are based at least in part on a physical measurement associated with the transmitting device (Paragraph [0123], amount of data buffered is claimed physical measurement associated with the transmitting device).
Regarding 14:
Horn discloses the apparatus wherein the set of filler tones are associated with a boosted transmit power (Paragraph [0133], TR subcarriers (claimed filler tones) are boosted i.e. associated with a boosted transmit power).
Regarding 15:
Horn discloses the apparatus wherein the set of filler tones are associated with a reduced transmit power (Paragraph [0133], TR subcarriers (claimed filler tones) are de-boosted i.e. associated with a reduced transmit power).
Regarding 16:
Horn discloses the apparatus wherein the one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to: transmit, to the IoT device, an indication of the set of filler tones (Paragraph [0136]).
Further, Horn discloses that the base station (claimed transmitting device) communicates data (set of signals) with one or more UEs (i.e. a set of IoT devices) (Paragraph [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Horn’s teaching of communicating data with one or more UE would result in the claimed invention of the set of signals intended for and transmitted to a set of IoT devices. It would have been obvious because the communication between multiple entities allows for the transmitting device to communicate with a plurality of devices in its network.
Regarding claims 18 and 19:
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected as being obvious over Horn based on a rationale similar to the one used to reject claim 1 above.
Claims 9, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn in view of Li et al. (US 20220022236 A1), hereinafter, Li.
Regarding claim 9:
Horn discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to: transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional signals without filler tones.
However, Li discloses tone reservation (Paragraph [0089]) wherein the one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors (Paragraph [0005]) to cause a transmitting device to: transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional signals without filler tones (Paragraphs [0026], [0163], second set of tones for peak reduction (filler tones) are not allocated, i.e. transmission is made without filler tones).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Horn’s one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional signals without filler tones as disclosed by Li. It would have been obvious to do so in cases where peak reduction is not necessary, thereby saving processing power.
Regarding claim 10:
Horn discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to: transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional filler tones without signals for the set of IoT devices.
However, Li discloses tone reservation (Paragraph [0089]) wherein the one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors (Paragraph [0005]) to cause a transmitting device to: transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional filler tones without signals for intended receiver.
(Paragraphs [0005], [0063]; second set of tones is only peak reduction signal (filler tones, i.e. without signal/data for the intended receiver); thus a transmission of the second set of tones at a second time period is claimed additional filter tones).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Horn’s one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional tones without signal to the receiver as disclosed by Li, thereby resulting in claimed transmitting to the set of ioT devices. It would have been obvious to do so in cases where signal distortions are too great and impacting the reliability of the transmissions in the system (Paragraph [0089]).
Regarding claim 11:
Horn and Li disclose all the limitations of claim 10 above.
Li further discloses the apparatus wherein the set of additional filler tones are transmitted without signals in response to an allocation, associated with the receiver, failing to meet one or more conditions (Paragraph [0151], PAPR fails to satisfy a threshold, claimed one or more conditions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Horn’s one or more memories include instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the transmitting device to transmit, in a second time period, a set of additional tones without signal in response to an allocation, associated with receiver, failing to meet one or more conditions
to the receiver as disclosed by Li, thereby resulting in claimed transmitting to the set of ioT devices. It would have been obvious to do so in cases where signal distortions are too great and impacting the reliability of the transmissions in the system (Paragraph [0089]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn in view of Qi (US 20220104140 A1), hereinafter, Qi.
Regarding claim 13:
Horn discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose the apparatus, wherein a transmit power associated with each filler tone in the set of filler tones is determined using a quantity of filler tones in the set of filler tones.
However, Qi discloses a network with IoT devices wherein a transmit power associated with each tone is determined using a quantity of tones (Column 9, lines 23-35; wherein carrier is claimed tone).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Horn’s apparatus would use the teaching of determining a transmit power associated with each tone using a quantity of tones as disclosed by Qi, thereby resulting in claimed invention. It would have been obvious to do so in order to prevent using power boosting thereby saving power (Column 9, lines 23-35).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horn in view of Kim (US 20210119726 A1), hereinafter, Kim.
Regarding claim 17:
Horn discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the set of filler tones are configured for energy harvesting by one or more IoT devices in the set of IoT devices.
However, Kim discloses the set of filler tones are configured for energy harvesting by one or more IoT devices (Paragraphs [0062], [0126], energy harvester harvests energy from the reception signal comprising EH frame that is not modulated (claimed filler tone), i.e. of filler tones are configured for energy harvesting; paragraph [0003] for IoT device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Horn’s set of filler tones are configured for energy harvesting by one or more IoT devices as disclosed by Kim. It would have been obvious to do so in order to supply power effectively to low power consumption IoT devices (Paragraph [0003]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 6 and 8 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
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
Prosecution Insights