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
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 14, 15, 17-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Balasubramanian et al. (2022/0248432).
Regarding independent claim 1, Balasubramanian teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (via gNB) at an energy-harvesting wireless device (EH-WTRU; Fig. 1B), comprising:
one or more processors (118);
one or more memories (130, 132) coupled with the one or more processors; and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
communicate, with an energy-providing wireless device (a set of Legacy WTRUs), first control signaling indicating a plurality of energy-harvesting procedures supported by the energy- providing wireless device or the energy-harvesting wireless device ([0114], [0115], [0147], [0151], [0160]; the claimed “procedures” are equivalent to the various options/ways/methods to receive harvestable energy from the set of nearby energy-providing Legacy WTRUs; the claimed communication between the energy-providing and energy-harvesting wireless devices being done via the gNB; the devices communicate with each other the various options/ways to send and receive power based on location, direction of beams, etc.);
communicate, with the energy-providing wireless device based at least in part on the first control signaling, second control signaling indicating at least one energy- harvesting procedure supported by the energy-providing wireless device and the energy- harvesting wireless device, the at least one energy-harvesting procedure included within the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures ([0149], [0151], [0152], [0179]; both the energy-providing and energy-harvesting wireless devices communicate with each other to inform the other of their energy-harvesting procedures/capabilities/options; i.e. the options/ways/methods that they can send or receive power to the other; the devices communicating back and forth with each other before power is transmitted perform both the first and second control signaling); and
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device, an energy signal associated with the at least one energy-harvesting procedure ([0152], [0179], [0181], [0182]; the devices decide how they will transmit and receive the energy signal to/from the other and then do it).
Regarding claim 2, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
communicate, with the energy-providing wireless device, the first control signaling indicating an energy-harvesting pattern associated with the energy-providing wireless device or the energy-harvesting wireless device, wherein the energy signal is received within a time interval of a plurality of time intervals of the energy-harvesting pattern. ([0106], [0107]; the claimed “pattern” is equivalent to the times during a time period when a provider or harvester can send or receive the energy signal)
Regarding claim 3, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the energy-providing wireless device, the first control signaling indicating one or more parameters associated with at least one of the plurality of energy- harvesting procedures supported by the energy-harvesting wireless device, the one or more parameters indicating an energy efficiency, a charging rate, or both, wherein the second control signaling is received based at least in part on the one or more parameters ([0146], [0147]; the parameter being location/distance which indicates an energy efficiency; [0149] teaches the second control signal).
Regarding claim 4, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device, the second control signaling or additional control signaling indicating a set of resources (number of Legacy WTRU’s) usable for performing the at least one energy-harvesting procedure, wherein the energy signal is received within the set of resources ([0114], [0117]; the set of resources being the Legacy WTRU’s operating in each region; and the EH WTRU’s receive the energy signal from one of these Legacy WTRU’s).
Regarding claim 5, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device, the second control signaling or additional control signaling indicating a quasi co-location indicator, a transmission configuration indicator state, a transmission-reception point associated with the energy-providing wireless device, or any combination thereof, wherein receiving the energy signal is based at least in part on the quasi co-location indicator, the transmission configuration indicator state, the transmission-reception point, or any combination thereof ([0102], [0114]; receiving location/direction information of the WTRU’s, which indicate at least the quasi co-location indicator and transmission-reception point).
Regarding claim 6, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
receive a first quasi co-location indicator and a second quasi co-location indicator associated with a first transmission-reception point and a second transmission-reception point, respectively, associated with the energy-providing wireless device ([0133]; the various beam directions of the energy signal the energy-providing wireless device can provide and where the energy-harvesting wireless device would need to be to receive it);
receive the energy signal associated with the at least one energy-harvesting procedure via the first transmission-reception point and in accordance with the first quasi co- location indicator ([0134], [0135]; receive energy signal based on the best beam/receive direction); and
receive an additional energy signal associated with the at least one energy- harvesting procedure via the second transmission-reception point and in accordance with the second quasi co-location indicator ([0135]; receive energy signal based on another beam/receive direction; i.e. f1 and f2).
Regarding claim 8, Balasubramanian teaches the energy signal is received during a first time interval, and the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
communicate, with the energy-providing wireless device (via the gNB/base station), a capability indication that the energy-harvesting wireless device is capable of performing multiple temporally- overlapping energy-harvesting procedures ([0179], [0182]; “reception capability” and signaling time/frequency resources for energy harvesting); and
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device, a second energy signal associated with an additional energy-harvesting procedure based at least in part on the capability indication, wherein the second energy signal is received during a second time interval that at least partially overlaps in a time domain with the first time interval ([0135], [0182]; receive energy signal from transmissions of multiple WTRU’s).
Regarding claim 14, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the energy-providing wireless device (via gNB), the first control signaling indicating the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures supported by the energy-harvesting wireless device ([0146], [0147]); harvesting “procedures” (i.e. options/ways to receive energy) based partly on location and beam directions); and
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device (via gNB), the second control signaling indicating the at least one energy-harvesting procedure supported by the energy-providing wireless device ([0149]; deciding which beam direction).
Regarding claim 15, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the energy-providing wireless device (via gNB), the first control signaling indicating the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures supported by the energy-providing wireless device ([0114], [0115]; energy-providing devices provide their location and schedule and direction information); and
transmit, to the energy-providing wireless device (via gNB), the second control signaling indicating the at least one energy-harvesting procedure supported by the energy-harvesting wireless device ([0151], [0152]; energy-harvesting devices provide their location information that works with the possible directions/locations of the energy-providing devices).
Regarding claim 17, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
receive a wake-up signal from the energy-providing wireless device, wherein receiving the energy signal is based at least in part on receiving the wake-up signal ([0177]; wake-up signal starts process of power transmission).
Regarding claim 18, Balasubramanian teaches the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
generate energy based at least in part on receiving the energy signal ([0085]); and
perform one or more communications or other operations using the generated energy, storing the generated energy in an energy storage component, or both ([0085].
Regarding claim 19, Balasubramanian teaches the plurality of energy- harvesting procedures comprises a radio frequency-based energy-harvesting procedure, a light- based energy-harvesting procedure, a motion-based energy-harvesting procedure, a heat-based energy-harvesting procedure, or any combination thereof ([0045]; RF or light-based).
Regarding independent claim 21, Balasubramanian teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (via gNB) at an energy-providing wireless device (Legacy-WTRU; Fig. 1B), comprising:
one or more processors (118);
one or more memories (130, 132) coupled with the one or more processors; and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors, individually or collectively, to cause the apparatus to:
communicate, with an energy-harvesting wireless device (EH-WTRUs), first control signaling indicating a plurality of energy-harvesting procedures supported by the energy- providing wireless device or the energy-harvesting wireless device ([0114], [0115], [0147], [0151], [0160]; the claimed “procedures” are equivalent to the various options/ways/methods to receive harvestable energy from the set of nearby energy-providing Legacy WTRUs; the claimed communication between the energy-providing and energy-harvesting wireless devices being done via the gNB; the devices communicate with each other the various options/ways/methods to send and receive power based on location, direction of beams, etc.);
communicate, with the energy-harvesting wireless device based at least in part on the first control signaling, second control signaling indicating at least one energy- harvesting procedure supported by the energy-providing wireless device and the energy- harvesting wireless device, the at least one energy-harvesting procedure included within the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures ([0149], [0151], [0152], [0179]; both types of devices communicate with each other to inform the other of their energy-harvesting procedures/capabilities/options; i.e. the options/ways/methods that they can send or receive power to the other; the devices communicating back and forth with each other before power is transmitted perform both the first and second control signaling); and
transmit, to the energy-harvesting wireless device, an energy signal associated with the at least one energy-harvesting procedure ([0152], [0179], [0181], [0182]; the devices decide how they will transmit and receive power to/from the other and then do it).
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.
Claim(s) 7, 9, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. (2022/0248432) and Feki et al. (2018/0138754). Balasubramanian teaches the apparatus as described above.
Regarding claim 7, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach communicating a request for the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures. Feki teaches a similar system and apparatus (Abstract) to that of Balasubramanian. Feki teaches communicating, with an energy-providing wireless device (energy provider/base station), a request (“energy status message”) for the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures for an energy-harvesting wireless device (101) ([0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate a request for the energy-harvesting procedures in Balasubramanian’s invention so that an energy-harvesting wireless device can explicitly inform an energy-providing wireless device of their need for more energy and begin the process of receiving power to charge/operate their device.
Regarding claim 9, Feki teaches the idea of transmitting, to the energy-providing wireless device based at least in part on receiving the energy signal, a report (i.e. a status message for the next time window, after time T) indicating one or more parameters associated with the at least one energy-harvesting procedure ([0045], [0057]; the report being a second status message sent after the first period is over and power had been received, the energy-harvesting device reassesses their battery levels and requests a subsequent status message (i.e. report) for the next time window). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit a report to the energy-providing wireless device to inform them of if/how their previous energy transmission was received and if it was effective/efficient.
Regarding claim 13, Feki teaches communicating, with the energy-providing wireless device, third control signaling indicating that one or more energy-harvesting procedures is no longer supported by the energy-providing wireless device or the energy-harvesting wireless device for a time interval ([0059]; sending an energy status message indicating that the current level of their battery is sufficient and doesn’t need to receive any more power). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate third control signaling in Balasubramanian’s invention so that unnecessary/unneeded power isn’t transmitted and wasted when the energy-harvesting wireless device doesn’t need any more power.
Regarding claim 16, Balasubramanian teaches the plurality of energy-harvesting procedures comprise first and second energy-harvesting procedures (the various power transmission options from the various legacy WTRUs). Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach transmitting to the energy-harvesting device energy storage capacities associated with the energy-harvesting procedures. Feki teaches transmitting to the energy-harvesting device energy storage capacities associated with the energy-harvesting procedures, wherein receiving the energy signal is based on the energy storage capacity ([0062], in the form of the ESG message from the energy-providing device to inform the energy-harvesting device to satisfy energy storage capacity requested based on the status message). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit energy storage capacities associated with the energy-harvesting procedures to inform the energy-harvesting wireless device of the amount of power to be transmitted and soon-to-be stored in the energy-harvesting wireless device.
Claim(s) 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. (2022/0248432) and Ceribelli et al. (2017/0039861). Balasubramanian teaches the apparatus as described above.
Regarding claim 9, Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach transmitting a report indicating one or more parameters associated with the energy-harvesting procedure. Ceribelli teaches a similar system and apparatus (Figs. 1, 4, 5) to that of Balasubramanian. Ceribelli teaches an energy-harvesting wireless device (UAV, 50 including 150) and a plurality of energy-providing wireless devices (510, 520, 530, 590). Ceribelli also teaches transmitting, to the energy-providing wireless device (via 400 and/or server) based at least in part on receiving the energy signal, a report indicating one or more parameters (i.e. location, current energy-harvesting rates, etc.) associated with the energy-harvesting procedure ([0070]; the energy-harvesting device constantly communicates with/reports to the energy-providing device data regarding the energy-harvesting procedure). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit reports to the energy-providing wireless device to continuously monitor the progress of the energy-harvesting procedure and can adjust the process if necessary to more efficiently harvest energy.
Regarding claim 10, Ceribelli fails to explicitly teach receiving, from the energy-providing device, a reporting configuration for transmitting reports, however, it would be inherent in Ceribelli’s system that reporting configurations are known between the energy-providing and energy-harvesting devices since they are communicating data in the reports that are received and understood by the energy-providing device. Therefore there must have been some type of pre-communication between the devices to understand the type/configuration of report that needs to be transmitted from the energy-harvesting device to the energy-providing device for the energy-providing device to comprehend and respond to in helping the energy-harvesting procedure work as efficiently as possible.
Regarding claim 11, Ceribelli teaches receiving, from the energy-providing wireless device based at least in part on transmitting the report, an instruction to selectively adjust one or more reception parameters for receiving energy signals associated with the at least one energy-harvesting procedure ([0070], instructing the energy-harvesting device to adjust its movement or mission to more efficiently harvest the energy after receiving the report); and
receive an additional energy signal associated with the at least one energy- harvesting procedure based at least in part on the instruction (receive signal at a different location once the energy-harvesting device has moved based on the instructions in response to the report).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balasubramanian et al. (2022/0248432) and Vannithamby (9,271,242). Balasubramanian teaches the apparatus as described above.
Balasubramanian fails to explicitly teach receiving additional controlling indicating a plurality of energy-harvesting types. Vannithamby teaches a similar communication system for energy-harvesting wireless devices (UE’s; Col. 3, lines 52-61) to that of Balasubramanian.
Vannithamby teaches receiving additional control signaling indicating a plurality of energy-harvesting types, wherein each energy-harvesting type supports a respective set of energy-harvesting procedures (Col. 8, lines 38-48; the UE (aka energy-harvesting device) sends information about the type of harvesting procedure it supports); and
communicate, via the first control signaling, an indication of an energy-harvesting type associated with the energy-harvesting wireless device, wherein communicating the second control signaling, receiving the energy signal, or both, is based at least in part on the energy- harvesting type (Col. 8 lines 38-48; the UE indicates the type of energy-harvesting associated with it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to, in Balasubramanian’s invention, receive additional control signaling indicating a plurality of energy-harvesting types and the type associated with an energy-harvesting wireless device, so that the energy-providing wireless device in Balasubramanian’s invention knows what type of energy-harvesting needs to be supplied to the energy-harvesting wireless device so that the correct type of power is transmitted.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DRU M PARRIES whose telephone number is (571)272-8542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday from 9:00am to 6:00pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rexford Barnie, can be reached on 571-272-7492. 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).
DMP
2/24/2026
/DANIEL KESSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836