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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/13/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Action on 05/12/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 8/10/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 9-10, and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Zhang et al. US 2025/0324253, further in view of Cui US 2025/0142541.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 14, define “IoT” in line 5.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3, 7-8, 16, and 20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the interference" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the interference" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the interference" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the interference" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the interference" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059, further in view of Cui US 2025/0142541.
Consider claim 1, Cheng discloses A method for a reader (see FIG. 3, RFID reader 302), the method comprising:
sending a carrier wave that is an unmodulated sinusoid to RFID tag (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the reader 302 sends an unmodulated signal 312 over high energy carrier wave to RFID tag 304);
receiving a backscattered signal from the RFID tag (see FIG. 1 and 3, ¶ [0039] and [0041], wherein the modulated backscattered signal 310 is received from the RFID tag 304), wherein the backscattered signal is the carrier wave modulated with a sequence (see ¶ [0041], wherein the high energy carrier wave is modulated with coded information);
demodulate the backscattered signal using the sequence (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the reader 302 demodulates the received signal).
However Cheng does not explicitly disclose an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device; and wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round.
Patchava teaches an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device (see ¶ [0003], wherein the RFID reader is communicating with a passive internet of things terminal such as RFID tag). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng, and to include an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device, as taught by Zhang for the purpose of further disclosing different names for RFID tag.
However, Cheng and Patchava do not explicitly disclose wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round. Cui teaches wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round (see FIG. 7 and ¶ [0326], wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources is at beginning of every communication round). Cui further discloses transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal (see ¶ [0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng and Patchava, and to include wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round, as taught by Cui for the transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal.
Consider claim 2, Cheng discloses wherein the sequence is pre-configured (see ¶ [0041], wherein the coded information corresponding to the coded manner stored in data).
Consider claim 5, Cui discloses wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received from the ambient IoT device periodically (see FIG. 7-8, wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources are periodically received).
Consider claim 6, Patchava discloses sending, to the ambient IoT device, an indication of time resources on which the ambient IoT device is to send the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence (see ¶ [0004-0005]).
Claim(s) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059, further in view of Cui US 2025/0142541 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sarangapani et al. US 2008/0174410.
Consider claim 3, Cheng in view of Patchava in view of Cui discloses every claimed limitation in claim 1.
However Cheng in view of Patchava in view of Cui does not explicitly disclose performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference. Sarangapani teaches performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference (see ¶ [0009]). Sarangapani further discloses measuring degree of interference (see ¶ [0007]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng in view of Patchava in view of Cui, and to include performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference, as taught by Sarangapani for the purpose of measuring degree of interference.
Consider claim 7, Sarangapani discloses wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is forwarded from an intermediate node that is a second reader, and wherein the interference is measured at the second reader (see ¶ [0009]).
Claim(s) 9-10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059, further in view of Namikawa et al. US 2023/0222298 and further in view of Cui US 2025/0142541.
Consider claim 9, Cheng discloses A method for a device (see FIG. 3), the method comprising:
receiving a carrier wave that is an unmodulated sinusoid from a reader (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the reader 302 send an unmodulated signal 312 to the RFID tag 304 as high energy carrier);
modulating the carrier wave with coded information (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the RFID tag 304 modulated the received signal with coded information); and
sending, to the reader, a backscattered signal comprising the carrier wave modulated with the sequence (see FIG. 1 and 3, ¶ [0039] and [0041], wherein the RFID tag 304 send the modulated signal to the reader 302 as backscattered signal).
However Cheng does not explicitly disclose an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device; receiving a configuration for a sequence; and wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round.
Patchava teaches an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device (see ¶ [0003], wherein the RFID reader is communicating with a passive internet of things terminal such as RFID tag). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng, and to include an ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device, as taught by Patchava for the purpose of further disclosing different names for RFID tag.
Cheng and Patchava do not explicitly disclose receiving a configuration for a sequence. Namikawa teaches receiving a configuration for a sequence (see FIG. 1, ¶ [0076], wherein RDIF tag receives electromagnetic wave with predetermined code sequence from the reader). Namikawa further discloses capability to identify an attribute of an identification target with a simple configuration and high accuracy, as discussed by Namikawa (see ¶ [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng and Patchava, and to include receiving a configuration for a sequence, as taught by Namikawa for the purpose of identify an attribute of an identification target with a simple configuration and high accuracy.
However, Cheng and Patchava and Namikawa do not explicitly disclose wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round. Cui teaches wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round (see FIG. 7 and ¶ [0326], wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources is at beginning of every communication round). Cui further discloses transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal (see ¶ [0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng and Patchava and Namikawa, and to include wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round, as taught by Cui for the transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal.
Consider claim 10, Cui discloses wherein the backscattered signal comprising the carrier wave modulated with the sequence is sent for interference measurement (see ¶ [0549-0550] and [0559]).
Consider claim12, Cui discloses wherein the backscattered signal comprising the carrier wave modulated with the sequence is sent periodically (see FIG. 7-8, wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources are periodically sent).
Consider claim 13, Patchava discloses receiving, from the reader, an indication of time resources on which to send the backscattered signal comprising the carrier wave with the sequence (see ¶ [0003-0004], wherein the network entity may transmit an indication of time resources to the energy harvest UEs i.e. internet of things devices or RFID tags, to be applied for backscattering)
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059.
Consider claim 14, Cheng discloses A reader apparatus (see FIG. 3, RFID reader 302) comprising:
a processor (see FIG. 13-14, ¶ [0061-0062], processing unit 1420a); and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, configure the reader apparatus (see FIG. 14 and ¶ [0072], system memory 1430a) to:
sending a carrier wave that is an unmodulated sinusoid to RFID tag (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the reader 302 sends an unmodulated signal 312 over high energy carrier wave to RFID tag 304);
receiving a backscattered signal from the RFID tag (see FIG. 1 and 3, ¶ [0039] and [0041], wherein the modulated backscattered signal 310 is received from the RFID tag 304), wherein the backscattered signal is the carrier wave modulated with a sequence (see ¶ [0041], wherein the high energy carrier wave is modulated with coded information);
demodulate the backscattered signal using the sequence (see FIG. 3 and ¶ [0041], wherein the reader 302 demodulates the received signal).
However Cheng does not explicitly disclose send, to an ambient IoT device, an indication of time resources on which the ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device is to send a backscattered signal that is modulated with a sequence. Patchava teaches send, to an ambient IoT device, an indication of time resources on which the ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device is to send a backscattered signal that is modulated with a sequence (see ¶ [0003-0004], wherein the network entity may transmit an indication of time resources to the energy harvest UEs i.e. internet of things devices or RFID tags, to be applied for backscattering). Patchava further discloses capturing and converting rfom external sources into usable power for powering operations at the energy harvesting UEs (see ¶ [0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng, and to include send, to an ambient IoT device, an indication of time resources on which the ambient Internet of Things (IoT) device is to send a backscattered signal that is modulated with a sequence, as taught by Patchava for the purpose of capturing and converting rfom external sources into usable power for powering operations at the energy harvesting UEs.
Consider claim 15, Cheng discloses wherein the sequence is pre-configured (see ¶ [0041], wherein the coded information corresponding to the coded manner stored in data).
Claim(s) 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Sarangapani et al. US 2008/0174410.
Consider claim 16, Cheng in view of Patchava discloses every claimed limitation in claim 14.
However Cheng in view of Patchava does not explicitly disclose performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference. Sarangapani teaches performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference (see ¶ [0009]). Sarangapani further discloses measuring degree of interference (see ¶ [0007]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng in view of Patchava, and to include performing interference cancelation for a future signal reception from the ambient IoT device based on the interference, as taught by Sarangapani for the purpose of measuring degree of interference.
Consider claim 20, Sarangapani discloses wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is forwarded from an intermediate node that is a second reader, and wherein the interference is measured at the second reader (see ¶ [0009]).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. US 2007/0279231 in view of Patchava et al. US 2025/0031059 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Cui US 2025/0142541.
Consider claim 17, Cheng in view of Patchava discloses every claimed limitation in claim 14.
However, Cheng and Patchava do not explicitly disclose wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round. Cui teaches wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round (see FIG. 7 and ¶ [0326], wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources is at beginning of every communication round). Cui further discloses transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal (see ¶ [0003]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Cheng and Patchava, and to include wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received at a beginning of every communication round, as taught by Cui for the transmitting a signal in zero-power consumption terminal.
Consider claim 18, Cui discloses wherein the backscattered signal that is modulated with the sequence is received from the ambient IoT device periodically (see FIG. 7-8, wherein the backscatter communication time domain resources are periodically received).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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 JANICE N TIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-1888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Sam Ahn can be reached at (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 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.
/JANICE N TIEU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
