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 filed on 02/12/2025 and 12/22/2025 has been considered and placed of record in the file.
Oath/Declaration
The Oath or Declaration is being considered by examiner and complies with PTO requirements.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the coarse delay calibration unit is labeled as 10 and the precise delay calibration unit is labeled as 20 in the Specification page 4; however, the coarse delay calibration unit is labelled 1 and the precise delay calibration unit is labelled 2 in FIG. 1. The Specification and the Drawings are not consistent on labeling the same parts with different numbers. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: first coarse delay calibration unit 101 and first precise delay calibration unit 201 are recited in page 4 of the Specification; however, they are not showed in FIG. 2 of the drawing. And a second precise delay calibration unit 202 and a second coarse delay calibration unit 102 are recited in page 6 of the Specification; however, they are not showed in FIG. 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the coarse delay calibration unit is labeled as 10 and the precise delay calibration unit is labeled as 20 in the Specification page 4; however, the coarse delay calibration unit is labelled 1 and the precise delay calibration unit is labelled 2 in FIG. 1. The Specification and the Drawings are not consistent on labeling the same parts with different numbers.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the coarse delay calibration unit is configured to receive in claim 1; the precise delay calibration sub-unit is configured to perform in claim 1; the phase calibration sub-unit is configured to calibrate in claim 1; the transmission channel associated pulse generation module is configured to receive in claim 2; the transmission link channel associated pulse transfer module is configured to perform in claim 2; the second coarse delay calibration unit is further configured to generate in claim 2; the reception link channel associated pulse transfer module is configured to perform in claim 2; the reception channel associated pulse calibration module is configured to perform in claim 2; the second air interface pulse processing sub-unit is configured to generate in claim 4; the second channel associated pulse signal regeneration sub-unit is configured to reduce in claim 4; the second delay sub-unit is configured to eliminate in claim 4; the second coarse delay calibration sub-unit is configured to perform in claim 4; the second expansion sub-unit is configured to expand in claim 5; the first air interface pulse processing sub-unit is configured to generate in claim 6; the first delay sub-unit is configured to eliminate in claim 6; the first coarse delay calibration sub-unit is configured to perform in claim 6; the comparison sub-unit is configured to calculate in claim 7; the first air interface pulse signal regeneration sub-unit is configured to reduce in claim 7; the first channel associated pulse signal regeneration sub-unit is configured to reduce in claim 7; the first expansion sub-unit is configured to expand in claim 9; the channel associated pulse processing sub-unit is configured to receive in claim 10; the air interface pulse synchronization sub-unit is configured to synchronize in claim 10; the channel associated pulse synchronization sub-unit is configured to synchronize in claim 10; the determination sub-unit is configured to perform in claim 10; the precise delay calibration interrupt sub-unit is configured to generate in claim 10; the differential pulse gating sub-unit is configured to adjust in claim 13; and the clock frequency division sub-unit is configured to adjust in claim 13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 14-15, 17-20, and 22-25 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 14 appears to be a method claim written as a dependent claim form of independent claim 1, in which independent claim 1 is an apparatus claim. According to MPEP 2173.05(p)(II) states that “[a] single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)”. It is unclear whether the applicants indented claim 14 to be a method claim or an apparatus, hence, the scope of the claim is unclear and indefinite.
Examiner suggested rewriting claim 14 as an independent claim.
Claims 15, 17-20, and 22-25 are rejected under the same scope of independent claim 14 as being dependent on the rejected independent claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1 is drawn to A delay calibration apparatus, comprising a delay calibration module, wherein the delay calibration module comprises a coarse delay calibration unit and a precise delay calibration unit; the coarse delay calibration unit is configured to receive an air interface pulse signal, and perform delay compensation on a channel associated pulse signal in a digital clock domain according to the air interface pulse signal; the precise delay calibration unit comprises a precise delay calibration sub-unit and a phase calibration sub-unit; the precise delay calibration sub-unit is configured to perform delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in an analog clock domain after the coarse delay calibration unit performs the delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in the digital clock domain according to the air interface pulse signal; and the phase calibration sub-unit is configured to calibrate a clock domain phase after the precise delay calibration sub-unit performs the delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in the analog clock domain. Closest prior art, Ide et al. US 2009/0146716, discloses A delay calibration apparatus, comprising a delay calibration module, wherein the delay calibration module comprises a coarse delay calibration unit and a precise delay calibration unit. However, prior art of record fails to disclose either alone or in combination the details of the coarse delay calibration unit is configured to receive an air interface pulse signal, and perform delay compensation on a channel associated pulse signal in a digital clock domain according to the air interface pulse signal; the precise delay calibration unit comprises a precise delay calibration sub-unit and a phase calibration sub-unit; the precise delay calibration sub-unit is configured to perform delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in an analog clock domain after the coarse delay calibration unit performs the delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in the digital clock domain according to the air interface pulse signal; and the phase calibration sub-unit is configured to calibrate a clock domain phase after the precise delay calibration sub-unit performs the delay compensation on the channel associated pulse signal in the analog clock domain, as claimed in claim 1, in combination with each and every other limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13:
Claims 2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13 are allowed as being dependent on claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ide et al. US 2009/0146716; Alexandru US 2007/0239013; Vlasenko et al. US 2004/012595; and Wallin et al. US 2024/0205856.
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
Prosecution Insights