Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after Final Rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/10/26 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
3. In response to Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, with regard to claims 1, 8, 15 and their dependent claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remarks of the Applicant’s response, with regard to claims 1, 8 and 15, Applicant argues that although Hammerschmidt teaches in Figure 4 a SYNC Preamble and CIRTS/STS, Hammerschmidt fails to teach or suggest a synchronization (SYNC) field, wherein a length of the ultra-wideband signal is determined by a length of the CTS field, a length of the SYNC field, and a length of a null signal interval between the CTS field and the SYNC field. Examiner respectfully disagrees because the previously cited secondary reference, Dutz, teaches in Figure 3 a synchronization (SYNC) field (305 “SYNC”), wherein a length of the ultra-wideband signal is determined by a length of the CTS field (308 “STS”), a length of the SYNC field (305 “SYNC”), and a length of a null signal interval (307A “Guard”) between the CTS field (308 “STS”) and the SYNC field (305 “SYNC”).
Therefore, in light of broad claim language the arguments are not persuasive as the cited references disclose all the limitations, thus the 103 rejections are maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
5. Claims 4, 6-7, 11, 13-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites “a null signal interval” in line 2. It is not clear whether said “null signal interval” is different from or the same “a null signal interval” as recited in line 7 of claim 1. Hence, renders claim 4 indefinite. Similar rejection applies to claims 6-7, 11, 13-14 and 18.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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:
I. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
II. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
III. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
IV. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the Examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the Examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
8. Claims 1-18 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hammerschmidt (US 12,015,916 B2 –Cited Earlier) and in view of Dutz (US 10,805,092 B2 –Previously Cited).
Regarding claims 15, 1 & 8, Hammerschmidt teaches a signal transmission apparatus (Figure 14: “Hybrid Wireless Transceiver”, “NB (narrow band) wireless signaling” & “UWB (ultra-wideband) wireless signaling”), wherein the apparatus comprises: a first transmitter, the first transmitter configured to send a narrow band signal to a receive end, wherein the narrow band signal is used by the receive end to determine initial time-frequency synchronization information (Figure 14: “Hybrid Wireless Transceiver”, “NB wireless signaling”, Figure 18: “Transmit NB Poll Packet” & Column 5, Lines 1-13: the first device transmits the scheduled NB poll packet to the second device… the second device extracts a type of synchronization data from the sync field that corresponds to time and frequency synchronization information); and a second transmitter, the second transmitter configured to send an ultra-wideband signal to the receive end (Figure 14: “Hybrid Wireless Transceiver”, “UWB wireless signaling” & Figure 18: “Transmit UWB-Tx Poll Fragments”), wherein the ultra-wideband signal comprises a channel impulse response training sequence (CTS) field (Figure 4: CIRTS/STS & Figure 12: “UWB-CIRTS (channel impulse response training sequence)”), wherein the CTS field is used by the receive end to determine a channel impulse response (Figure 4: “CIRTS/STS”, Figure 12: “UWB-CIRTS”, Column 5 Lines 53-56: the second device uses the CIRTS to estimate a Channel Impulse Response (CIR) and/or determine other synchronization information (e.g., time and frequency information, scheduling data, etc.), Figure 18: “T/F SYNC; Data” & “SYNC, CIR” ), wherein the CTS field comprises at least one CTS symbol (Figure 4: “CIRTS/STS”, Figure 12: “UWB-CIRTS”, Figure 21: “CIRTS frag1…N” & “Periodic Sequences E…E” (Row 3)). Although Hammerschmidt teaches said at least one CTS (CIRTS/STS) symbol, Hammerschmidt does not explicitly disclose a synchronization (SYNC) field, wherein a length of the ultra-wideband signal is determined by a length of the CTS field, a length of the SYNC field, and a length of a null signal interval between the CTS field and the SYNC field, wherein the at least one CTS symbol is generated by spreading at least one first preamble symbol. In a related field of endeavor, Dutz discloses a synchronization (SYNC) field (Figure 3: 305 “SYNC”), wherein a length of the ultra-wideband signal is determined by a length of the CTS field (Figure 3: 308 “STS”), a length of the SYNC field (Figure 3: 305 “SYNC”), and a length of a null signal interval (Figure 3: 307A “Guard”) between the CTS field (Figure 3: 308 “STS”) and the SYNC field (Figure 3: 305 “SYNC”), wherein the at least one CTS symbol is generated by spreading at least one first preamble symbol (Figure 3: 308 “STS”, Figure 14: 1402 “Spreading” & Column 28, Lines 9-10: STS segment 1402 spreading a first segment 1403 and a second segment 1404). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hammerschmidt’s UWB signal to include a SYNC and an interval as in Dutz. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so realize time and frequency synchronization and to drive channel estimate, Column 1, Lines 43-45.
Regarding claims 16, 2 & 9, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the apparatus according to claim 15, the method according to claim 1 and the method according claim 8. In addition, Hammerschmidt discloses wherein the SYNC field is used by the receive end to determine target time-frequency synchronization information based on the initial time-frequency synchronization information, and the SYNC field comprises at least one second preamble symbol (Figure 12: “UWB-CIRTS”, Figure 18: “T/F SYNC; Data”, “SYNC, CIR” & Figure 4: “SYNC Preamble”).
Regarding claims 7 & 14, Hammerschmidt further discloses wherein there are a plurality of CTS symbols, the plurality of CTS symbols form a plurality of CTS segments, and there is a null signal interval between any two CTS segments (Figure 12: “UWB CIRTS frag1”… “UWB CIRTS fragN”).
Regarding claims 17 & 3, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the apparatus according to claim 16 and the method according to claim 2. In addition, Dutz discloses wherein the at least one first preamble symbol comprises a first preamble code (Figure 3: 308 “STS” & “coded @ STS rate”), and the at least one second preamble symbol comprises a second preamble code (Figure 3: 305 “SYNC” & “coded @ SHR rate”).
Regarding claims 18 & 4, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the apparatus according to claim 17 and the method according to claim 3. In addition, Hammerschmidt discloses wherein there are a plurality of CTS symbols, the plurality of CTS symbols form a plurality of CTS segments, and there is a null signal interval between any two CTS segments (Figure 12: “UWB CIRTS frag1”… “UWB CIRTS fragN”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the method according to claim 2. In addition, Dutz discloses wherein the at least one first preamble symbol is generated by spreading a first preamble code (Figure 3: 308 “STS” & “coded @ STS rate” & Column 28, Lines 9-10: STS segment 1402 spreading a first segment 1403 and a second segment 1404), and the at least one second preamble symbol is generated by spreading a second preamble code (Figure 3: 305 “SYNC” & “coded @ SHR rate” Column 24, Lines 34-35: de-spreading the SYNC field 305).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the method according to claim 5. In addition, Hammerschmidt discloses wherein there are a plurality of CTS symbols, the plurality of CTS symbols form a plurality of CTS segments, and there is a null signal interval between any two CTS segments (Figure 12: “UWB CIRTS frag1”… “UWB CIRTS fragN”).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Hammerschmidt and Dutz teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Dutz discloses wherein the ultra-wideband signal is used for subsequent ranging, and the length of the ultra-wideband signal is associated with a coverage area and a ranging frequency of the subsequent ranging (Figure 3, Column 9, Lines 29-31: IR-UWB RF transceivers at 60 GHz and higher frequencies… a range of different communication systems & Column 18 Lines 17-19: radio channel lengths of 300 m and 1200 m).
Regarding claim 22, Dutz further discloses wherein the length of the SYNC field and the length of the null signal interval between the CTS field and the SYNC field are user-defined (Figure 3, Column 18, Lines 3-5: a frame is designed more efficiently with a tighter bound on the radio channel length & Column 31, Lines 25-27: a guard interval of one segment in length where the segment comprises a predetermined length).
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to SHAWKAT M. ALI whose telephone number is (571) 270-1639. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:30AM-3:30PM ET.
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 AIR at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, SAM K. AHN can be reached on (571) 272-3044. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/SHAWKAT M ALI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights