www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/858,075
`
`04/24/2020
`
`Kenichi MIYOSHI
`
`733156.558C13
`
`9498
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`TIMORY, KABIR A
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2631
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/24/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-20 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C] Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-2,4-12 and 14-20 is/are rejected.
`Claim(s) 3and13 is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)() The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)C) accepted or b)C) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`cc) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)D) All
`1.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have beenreceived in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20211218
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/858,075
`MIYOSHI etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`KABIR A TIMORY
`2631
`No
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 11/16/2021.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AlA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`Responseto Arguments
`
`2.
`
`This office action is in response to the amendmentfiled on 11/16/2021. Claims
`
`1-20 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
`
`3.
`
`The objection to the claims 1-10 is not corrected and clarified by the amendment.
`
`Therefore, the objection is not withdrawn.
`
`4.
`
`Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been considered but
`
`are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection because of the amendments.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-10 are objected to becauseof the following informalities:
`
`In claim 1, line 2, the claim recites a phrase “which, in operation”. The phrase
`
`“which, in operation” is redundant language in the claim.
`
`It is unclear what the reason
`
`and purposethis limitation is in the claim. Does this limitation suggest that the claimed
`
`system only works when the receiver in operation? Are there any instancesthat
`
`receiver maynot be in operation? If so, would the claimed system still function? A
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 3
`
`receiver inherently receive and process information. Thus, the phrase “which, in
`
`operation” seems to be unnecessary and redundant in the claim. Therefore, the
`
`examiner is respectfully requesting deleting this phrase “which, in operation” from the
`
`claim. The sameissueexist in line 8, 9 and 10.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`6.
`
`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 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.
`
`Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in
`
`the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant.
`
`Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are
`
`applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures
`
`may apply as well.
`
`Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states:
`
`A prior art reference must be consideredin its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including
`
`portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
`
`v. Garlock,Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S.
`
`851 (1984).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 4
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`7.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousnessrejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented
`andthe prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obviousat the
`time the invention was madeto a person having ordinaryskill in the art to which said subject
`matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in whichthe invention was
`made.
`
`8.
`
`The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness
`
`under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence presentin the application indicating
`
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 1-2, 4-12 and 14-20 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20030081690) (hereinafter Kim) in view of
`
`Moon etal. (US 20030076870) (hereinafter Moon).
`
`rid
`
`p 820
`severe
`
`aTa,
`SORARCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7260
`é
`
`
`
`
`
`CONTROLLER|35
`
`
`TO ee
`}
`~~ 885
`
`REASRANGEMENT
`
`CONTROLIER
`
`rT
`{|
`
`4
`
`~“
`~~ 850
`
`FIG.8
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Regarding claims 1 and 11:
`
`Page 5
`
`As shownin figures 1-11, Kim discloses a communication apparatus (par 0029)
`
`comprising:
`
`e
`
`areceiver (see block 885 in figure 8), which, in operation, receives control
`
`e
`
`e
`
`information (see control signal in figure 8);
`
`and circuitry (860 in figure 8), which, in operation:
`
`forcibly sets each place of a number of bits out of a plurality of bits to a 1 (in par
`
`0045 Kim teaches“a first interleaver interleaves the high-priority bits, a
`
`secondinterleaver interleaves the low-priority bits, a PSC converts the
`
`outputs of the first and second interleavers to one coded bit stream”); and
`
`e mapsthe plurality of bits on one of modulation symbols in a modulation mapper (see
`
`figures 7, 880 in figure 8, abstract, par 0008, 0014-0015),
`
`e wherein a number of the modulation symbols is less than a M-ary number (16 QAM,
`
`64 QAM. See par 0022) of the modulation mapper (par 0022-0024).
`
`Kim discloses all of the subject matter as described above exceptfor specifically
`
`teaching the number of bits being determined from the control information.
`
`However, Moon in the same field of endeavor teaches the number of bits being
`
`determined from the control information (in par 0063 Moon teaches “A mapping
`
`pattern of the coded bits is determined according to the modulation technique
`
`information provided from the controller 726”).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinaryskill in the art at the time
`
`the invention was made to use modulation technique as taught by Moon to modify the
`
`modulation system and method of Kim in order to determine mapping pattern of the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 6
`
`codedbits (par 0063) (See KSR Rationale: Combining prior art elements according
`
`to known methods toyield predictable results).
`
`Regarding claims 2 and 12:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein the modulation symbols are part of the M-ary (16
`
`QAM,64 QAM. Seepar 0022) number of modulation symbols (par 0022-0024).
`
`Regarding claims 4 and 14:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein the modulation symbols are detected by positive or
`
`negative decision only with respect to at least one of an I-axis and a Q-axis in the
`
`modulation mapper (par 0011).
`
`Regarding claims 5 and 15:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein the number of the modulation symbols is 4, and
`
`the M-ary number is 16 (16 QAM. See par 0022).
`
`Regarding claims 6 and 16:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein the number of the modulation symbols is 4 out of
`
`16 modulation symbols in the modulation mapper for 16 QAM (see 16 QAMin par
`
`0022).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 17:
`
`Page 7
`
`Kim further discloses wherein the modulation symbols form a constellation of
`
`BPSK, QPSK or 8-PSK in the modulation mapper for 16QAM (par 0022-0024).
`
`Regarding claims 8 and 18:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein said circuitry, in operation, forcibly sets each place
`
`of the lower twobits of the plurality of bits to the 1 (par 0045).
`
`Regarding claims 9 and 19:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein said circuitry, in operation, forcibly sets each place
`
`of the lower twobits of the plurality of bits to the 1 (par 0045), and the number of the
`
`modulation symbols is 4, and the M-ary number is 16 (par 0022-0024).
`
`Regarding claims 10 and 20:
`
`Kim further discloses wherein said circuitry, in operation, forcibly sets each place
`
`of the lower four bits of the plurality of bits to the 1 (see figures 2-3 and 7, par 0045).
`
`
`
`10. Claims 3 and 13 are objected to as being dependent uponarejected baseclaim,
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of
`
`the base claim and any intervening claims.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 8
`
`11.
`
`The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject
`
`matter:
`
`The prior art of record, Kim does not teach or suggest wherein a distance
`
`between the modulation symbols is equivalent to a largest of distance existing among
`
`the M-ary number of modulation symbols in the modulation mapper.
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in
`
`this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP
`
`§ 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37
`
`CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortenedstatutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the eventafirst replyis filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS ofthe mailing date ofthis final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortenedstatutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later
`
`than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to KABIR A TIMORY whosetelephone number is
`
`(571)270-1674. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/858,075
`Art Unit: 2631
`
`Page 9
`
`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 AutomatedInterview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Shuwang Liu can be reached on 571-272-3036. 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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on accessto the Private
`
`PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197(toll-free).
`
`If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access
`
`to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or 571-
`
`272-1000.
`
`/KABIR A TIMORY/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
`
`