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 Objections
Claims 12-16 and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
As to claim 12, line 8, “FS” should be fully defined.
As to claim 18, line 5, “FS” should be fully defined.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rama Chandran (US 2023/0208559) in view of Kang et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Kang”, US 2023/0108782).
As to claim 17, Rama Chandran teaches providing, to a distributed unit (DU), an indication of an N-bit representation used for open radio access network (0-RAN) fronthaul packets provided to the DU (Figs. 5-7 and 9-11, ACK/NACK messages, claim 40, paragraphs [0099] and [0111]); and providing one or more fronthaul packets to the DU based on the N-bit representation indicated by the RU (Figs. 5-7 and 9-11, ACK/NACK messages, claim 40, paragraphs [0099] and [0111]).
Rama Chandran does not expressly teach an apparatus for wireless communication at a radio unit (RU), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on stored information that is stored in the at least one memory (Fig. 3, storage 320, controller/processor 330, paragraph [0073]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the radio unit (RU) taught by Rama Chandra to include at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on stored information that is stored in the at least one memory in order to perform the above recited functions/steps in a flexible manner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 are allowed. Claims 18-20 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kaikkonen, US 2024/0205114, abstract, Figs. 1-4, paragraphs [0017]-[0025] disclose method of determining a bit length of an IQ sample, but fail to disclose iteratively applying one or more full scale offset values
Vaez-Ghaemi et al., US 2025/0106683, abstract, Figs. 1-7
Lim et al., US 2025/0240672, abstract, Figs. 2-7
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRESHTEH N AGHDAM whose telephone number is (571)272-6037. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:30-7:00 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 Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/FRESHTEH N AGHDAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632 8/7/2026
Prosecution Insights