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 .
This communication is response to claims filed on 10/04/24.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement’s
4. The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 10/04/24 & 04/21/26 have being considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Drawing
5. The drawings filed on 10/04/24 are accepted by the examiner.
Specification
6. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Examiner suggested to change the title to “HOW TO REDUCE AN INTERFERENCE CAUSED BY LARGE-SCALE DEPLOYMNET OF ZERO POWER CONSUMPTION DEVICES”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims Objections
7. Claims 2, 7-8, 10, 15, 17 & 19-20 are objected to because of minor informalities:
8. Claim 2, in part, recites, “…data signal…in line 3. For consistency and clarification with “a data signal” recited in claim 2, lines 1-2, it is suggested to change “data signal” in line 3, to “the data signal”.
9. Claims 7 & 19 are also objected for the same reason as claim 2 above.
10. Claim 2, in part, recites, “…and/or…in line 1. It is suggested to clarify the use of words instead of “/”.
11. Claims 7-8, 10, 15 & 19-20 are also objected for the same reason as claim 2 above.
12. Claim 17 is also objected since they are depend upon objected dependent claim set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
13. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
14. Claims 1-8, 13-14 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tao et al. (hereinafter referred as Tao) European Patent Application EP 3 972 178 A1 (as disclosed in the IDS).
Regarding claim 1: Tao discloses a first device (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., first device in FIG. 1C)), comprising:
a processor (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., first device in FIG. 1C) includes Processor) and
a memory (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., first device in FIG. 1C) includes a memory), wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, the processor is configured to call and run the computer program stored in the memory, to cause the first device to perform:
transmitting a first signal to a second device (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0049; the first device sends a back reflection signal to the second device),
wherein the first signal is backscatter-transmitted by the first device based on a second signal (See Para. 0048; wherein the back reflection signal is a signal transmitted by the second device),
a symbol length corresponding to the first signal is N times a symbol length corresponding to the second signal (See Para. 0049; Duration of one modulation symbol in the back-reflection signal is N times duration of one channel estimation unit in the background signal), and the second signal is transmitted by a third device (See FIG. 1C & Para. 0045; the background signal is transmitted between the second device or a third device), wherein N is a positive integer greater than 1 (See Para. 0049; N is an integer greater than or equal to 1).
Regarding claim 2: Tao discloses a first device, wherein the first signal comprises a pilot signal and/or a data signal; wherein in a case where the first signal comprises the pilot signal and data signal, the pilot signal is before the data signal, or the pilot signal is after the data signal, or the pilot signal is within the data signal (See FIG. 3, 5, 7 & Para. 0062; data and pilot subcarrier).
Regarding claim 3: Tao discloses a first device, wherein the first device further performs: receiving first indication information transmitted by the third device, wherein the first indication information is used for indicating that the first device performs data transmission; wherein the first signal is transmitted in a case where the first indication information is received by the first device (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0044 & 0051).
Regarding claim 4: Tao discloses a first device, wherein the first device further performs: receiving second indication information transmitted by the second device, wherein the second indication information is used for indicating that the first device performs data transmission; wherein the first signal is transmitted in a case where the second indication information is received by the first device (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0044 & 0051).
Regarding claim 5: Tao discloses a first device, wherein the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a time domain; the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a frequency domain (See FIG. 3 & Para. 0058).
Regarding claim 6: Tao discloses a second device (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., second device in FIG. 1C)), comprising:
a processor (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., second device in FIG. 1C) includes Processor) and a memory (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., second device in FIG. 1C) includes a memory), wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, the processor is configured to call and run the computer program stored in the memory, to cause the second device to perform:
receiving a first signal transmitted by at least one first device (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0049; the first device sends a back reflection signal to the second device),
wherein the first signal is backscatter-transmitted based on a second signal (See Para. 0048; wherein the back reflection signal is a signal transmitted by the second device), and
a symbol length corresponding to the first signal is N times a symbol length corresponding to the second signal (See Para. 0049; Duration of one modulation symbol in the back-reflection signal is N times duration of one channel estimation unit in the background signal), wherein N is a positive integer greater than 1 (See Para. 0049; N is an integer greater than or equal to 1).
Regarding claim 7: Tao discloses a second device, wherein the first signal comprises a pilot signal and/or a data signal; wherein in a case where the first signal comprises the pilot signal and data signal, the pilot signal is before the data signal, or the pilot signal is after the data signal, or the pilot signal is within the data signal (See FIG. 3, 5, 7 & Para. 0062; data and pilot subcarrier).
Regarding claim 8: Tao discloses a second device, wherein the second signal comprises a pilot signal and/or a data signal; wherein in a case where the second signal comprises the pilot signal and data signal, the pilot signal is before the data signal, or the pilot signal is after the data signal, or the pilot signal is within the data signal (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0044 & 0051).
Regarding claim 13: Tao discloses a second device, wherein the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a time domain; the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a frequency domain (See FIG. 3 & Para. 0058).
Regarding claim 14: Tao discloses a third device (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., third device in FIG. 1C)), comprising:
a processor (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., third device in FIG. 1C) includes Processor) and a memory (See FIG. 20 & Para. 0142; a device (i.e., third device in FIG. 1C) includes Processor), wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, the processor is configured to call and run the computer program stored in the memory, to cause the second device to perform:
transmitting a second signal to a second device (See FIG. 1C & Para. 0045; the background signal is transmitted between the second device or a third device), wherein the second signal is used by a first device to perform backscatter to obtain a first signal (See Para. 0048-0049; the first device generates a back reflection signal of a back ground signal, where the back-ground signal is a signal transmitted by aa second device), and a symbol length corresponding to the first signal is N times a symbol length corresponding to the second signal (See Para. 0049; Duration of one modulation symbol in the back-reflection signal is N times duration of one channel estimation unit in the background signal), wherein N is a positive integer greater than 1 (See Para. 0049; N is an integer greater than or equal to 1).
Regarding claim 18: Tao discloses a third device, wherein the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a time domain; the first signal and the second signal overlap at least partially in a frequency domain (See FIG. 2 & Para. 0044 & 0051).
Regarding claim 19: Tao discloses a third device, wherein the first signal comprises a pilot signal and/or a data signal; wherein in a case where the first signal comprises the pilot signal and data signal, the pilot signal is before the data signal, or the pilot signal is after the data signal, or the pilot signal is in the data signal (See FIG. 3, 5, 7 & Para. 0062; data and pilot subcarrier).
Regarding claim 20: Tao discloses a third device, wherein the second signal comprises a pilot signal and/or a data signal; wherein in a case where the second signal includes a pilot signal and a data signal, the pilot signal is before the data signal, or the pilot signal is after the data signal, or the pilot signal is within the data signal (See FIG. 3, 5, 7 & Para. 0062; data and pilot subcarrier).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
16. Claims 9-11 & 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tao, in view of Alexandros et al. (hereinafter referred as Alexandros) International Publication Application No. WO 2023/278901 A1.
Regarding claim 9: Tao discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with an exception of wherein the second device further performs: transmitting second indication information to a target first device, wherein the second indication information is used for indicating that the target first device performs data transmission; wherein channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices.
However, Alexandros from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein the second device further performs: transmitting second indication information to a target first device, wherein the second indication information is used for indicating that the target first device performs data transmission; wherein channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices (See FIG. 13 & Para. 0061 & 0103-0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the second device further performs: transmitting second indication information to a target first device, wherein the second indication information is used for indicating that the target first device performs data transmission; wherein channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices as taught by Alexandros in the system of Tao to select harvesting peers in cellular network (See Para. 0002; lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 10: The combination of Tao and Alexandros disclose the second device.
Furthermore, Alexandros discloses the second device, wherein the second device further performs: transmitting third indication information to a third device, wherein the third indication information is used for indicating that the third device notifies a target first device to perform data transmission and/or that channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices; wherein the third indication information is identification information of the target first device (See FIG. 13, Para. 0061 & Para. 0103-0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the second device further performs: transmitting third indication information to a third device, wherein the third indication information is used for indicating that the third device notifies a target first device to perform data transmission and/or that channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices; wherein the third indication information is identification information of the target first device as taught by Alexandros in the system of Tao to select harvesting peers in cellular network (See Para. 0002; lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 11: The combination of Tao and Alexandros disclose the second device.
Furthermore, Alexandros discloses the second device, wherein the second device further performs: transmitting CSI of multiple first devices to a third device; wherein the CSI of the multiple first devices are used for the third device to determine a target first device among the multiple first devices (See FIG. 13, Para. 0061 & Para. 0103-0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the second device further performs: transmitting CSI of multiple first devices to a third device; wherein the CSI of the multiple first devices are used for the third device to determine a target first device among the multiple first devices as taught by Alexandros in the system of Tao to select harvesting peers in cellular network (See Para. 0002; lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 15 The combination of Tao and Alexandros disclose the third device.
Furthermore, Alexandros discloses the third device, wherein the third device further performs: receiving third indication information transmitted by the second device, wherein the third indication information is used for indicating that the third device notifies a target first device to perform data transmission and/or that channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices; wherein the third indication information is identification information of the target first device (See FIG. 13, Para. 0061 & Para. 0103-0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the third device further performs: receiving third indication information transmitted by the second device, wherein the third indication information is used for indicating that the third device notifies a target first device to perform data transmission and/or that channel state information (CSI) corresponding to the target first device is strongest among multiple first devices; wherein the third indication information is identification information of the target first device as taught by Alexandros in the system of Tao to select harvesting peers in cellular network (See Para. 0002; lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 16 The combination of Tao and Alexandros disclose the third device.
Furthermore, Alexandros discloses the third device, wherein the third device further performs: receiving, by the third device, CSI of multiple first devices transmitted by the second device; wherein the third device further performs: determining a target first device among the multiple first devices according to the CSI of the multiple first devices (See FIG. 13, Para. 0061 & Para. 0103-0104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the third device further performs: receiving, by the third device, CSI of multiple first devices transmitted by the second device; wherein the third device further performs: determining a target first device among the multiple first devices according to the CSI of the multiple first devices as taught by Alexandros in the system of Tao to select harvesting peers in cellular network (See Para. 0002; lines 1-2).
Allowable Subject Matter
17. Claims 12 & 17 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
18. The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
A. Zuo et al. 2025/0126559 A1 (Title: State determination method and apparatus…) (See Abstract, Para. 0012 & 0037-0038).
B. Kaiki et al. 2007/0118788 A1 (Title: Digital demodulation apparatus) (See abstract, Para. 0006 & 00813-0016).
C. HE et al. 2025/0365662 A1 (Title: Method for wireless communication, network device and…) (See FIG. 1, Para. 0046, 0050 & 0160).
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEWALE A AMBAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-1076. The examiner can normally be reached on M.F 6a.m.-2p.m..
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, Ian Moore can be reached on (571)272-3085. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEWALE A AMBAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights