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
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “claims” should read: --claim--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim has not been further treated on the merits.
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 1-9 and 11 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.
Concerning claim 1, the metes and bounds of the "adjusting the radio output power for a subsequent transmission..." limitation beginning on line 9 are not clear. The method does not appear to include a limitation of actually performing a "subsequent transmission" and it is unclear if this is the intent. Lacking actual transmission, it is not clear what a step of "adjusting the radio output power" itself requires. The specification largely discusses such adjustment with language similar to that of the claim but appears to generally describe power adjustment in the context of an actual transmission, rather than a step in itself as claimed. Is such a transmission intended? What performs it? The claimed reference to “the radio output power” refers back to the radio output power used to transmit the data packet to the receiver. Is this power adjusted for a “subsequent transmission” to the receiver, or does the receiver take this power and “adjust” it for its own “subsequent transmission”?
Similarly concerning claim 10, the claim requires the node (receiving node) be adapted to adjust the radio output power for a subsequent transmission. It is unclear if the node is actually configured to perform a subsequent transmission or otherwise what the metes and bounds of such an adjustment function are as addressed above. Claims 2-8 and 11 depend on claims 1 and 10 respectively, and are likewise indefinite.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the signal strength of said data packet" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A “data packet” itself is not conventionally considered to inherently have a “signal strength” and none is previously referenced. It is noted the specification more accurately refers to a “received signal strength associated with a data packet”, e.g. at [0092], as the signal carrying a data packet is conventionally what has a measurable “strength”, not the packet itself.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "adjusting the bitrate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. What “bitrate” is “adjusted”? Is this for the “subsequent transmission” discussed above? Does the “subsequent transmission” include a data packet?
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) 1-3, 5, 7-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemkin (8,325,704) in view of Richards et al. (6,571,089).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 8, Lemkin discloses a method for determining a distance with sub-GHz radio signals (column 4, lines 10-13) comprising the steps:
receiving at least one data packet (Fig. 1D) in a radio receiver (Master; Figure 6B, 616), wherein the data packet has a known structure (column 5, line 66-column 6, line 2),
biasing the radio receiver using a first section of the data packet (column 5, lines 8-10: (“Preamble 102 comprises a sequence of bits for synchronizing a clock for reading payload 108”);
performing a distance calculation based on a second section of the data packet (column 3, lines 1-4; column 5, lines 14-18; column 10, lines 29-46; Figure 9A; it is noted that the claim puts no limitation on what constitutes a “section” of the data packet or what “based on” requires; as one example only, a timestamp (e.g. 618) for the calculation may correspond to any “section” of the received data packet (column 5, lines 33-43), including those specified in claim 8 (note Figure 9A));
and
in a subsequent transmission, sending, by the receiver, a subsequent data packet back to the sender (604; it is noted while one iteration “ends” at the conclusion of Figure 6B, clearly the master and slave have subsequent communications and measurements. As one example only, Lemkin discloses in Figure 10 and column 11, lines 57-65 numerous distance measurements between master and slave).
While Lemkin also discloses comparing the data packet with the known structure of said data packet (column 6, lines 2-3) to check for validity, Lemkin is not found to disclose the claimed concept for power adjustment based on packet error rate and radio output power information, i.e.: wherein the data packet comprises information about a radio output power used when the data packet was transmitted;
determining a packet error rate based on the difference between the received data packet and the known structure of said data packet, and
adjusting the radio output power for a subsequent transmission, to minimize reflections of the radio signals, based on the information about the radio output power in the data packet and the determined packet error rate.
Richards relates to the field of radio communications between two transceivers and discloses: a method where a received data packet comprises information about the radio output power used when the data packet was transmitted and that the signal strength of said data packet is measured at reception (Figure 9, column 28, lines 21-29; in order to separate power changes due to different sources the signal strength must be measured, also see column 25, line 60);
comparing the data packet with a known structure of the received data packet, and determining a packet error rate based on the difference between the received data packet and the known structure (column 20, lines 30-43; column 13, lines 53-58); and
adjusting radio output power for a subsequent data packet transmission based on said information about radio output power in the data packet and the determined packet error rate, wherein radio output power for transmitting the subsequent data packet is dynamically adjusted to achieve a packet error rate between 0% and 10% (column 24, line 56-column 25, line 28, note error rate from 10-6 to 10-1; column 25, lines 56-67; Fig 9; column 13, lines 19-48; column 28, lines 39-55; Also Figure 18, 1808B).
That is, Richards discloses adjusting power of radio communications between transceivers (Figure 18) based on output power information and packet error rate determined as claimed, e.g. to increase power when the error rate is too high and reduce it when not necessary. Reflections of radio signals are minimized as a consequence of reducing power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement in Lemkin the claimed power adjustment process as disclosed by Richards with a reasonable expectation of success, i.e. to modify the radio communications between the master and slave transceivers of Lemkin to include power adjustment of subsequent master transmissions based on information carried by the data packet about radio output power used when the data packet was transmitted and a determined packet error rate, in order to maintain acceptable signal reception while minimizing the power required (Richards column 2, lines 20-23) with predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, Lemkin discloses operation in the claimed frequency range (column 4, lines 10-13).
Regarding claim 7, Richards discloses that an adjustment of the bit rate is a consequence of such power control (column 35, lines 4-13).
Regarding claim 9, the master transceiver of Lemkin as modified by Richards constitutes the claimed “node” adapted to perform as shown above concerning claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Lemkin discloses the claimed transceiver node timer start/stop times (column 10, lines 25-28; column 5, lines 33-43).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemkin in view of Richards as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schweber (“Understanding the Basics of Low-Noise and Power Amplifiers in Wireless Designs”).
Lemkin discloses that a low noise amplifier (LNA) is applied to the radio signal (column 8, lines 11-13) but does not explicitly indicate that gain control is applied in the amplifier. Schweber discloses basic information for radio signal receivers, teaching that some LNAs also include gain control so the amplifier can handle a wide dynamic range of input signals without overload and saturation (first page, fourth from bottom paragraph). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the LNA of Lemkin with a reasonable expectation of success to apply gain control to achieve conventional advantages in the art, i.e. so the amplifier can handle a wide dynamic range of input signals without overload and saturation with predictable results.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemkin in view of Richards as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tyson et al. (2015/0245412).
Lemkin is not found to include a variable indicating a counter value in the data packet, the value indicating the transmission order of multiple data packets within the mesh network. Tyson discloses a mesh network radio communications method including the use of such a count in the packets (paragraph [0055], “sequence number field”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Lemkin with a reasonable expectation of success to include such a count in each packet in order to ensure the packets are received and/or ordered in sequence with.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Brown discloses wireless synchronization of cells and client devices on a network including adjusting transmission power based on signal strength and bit error rate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew M Barker whose telephone number is (571)272-3103. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 8:00 AM-4:30 PM; Fri 8 AM-12 PM Eastern Time.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at 571-273-6878. 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.
/MATTHEW M BARKER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646