`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`13/649,477
`
`10/11/2012
`
`Yutaka SUWA
`
`MAT—8316US2
`
`1312
`
`RATNERPRESTIA
`PO. BOX 980
`VALLEY FORGE, PA 19482-0980
`
`HAILU, KIBROM T
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2461
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/12/2015
`
`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):
`
`ptocorrespondence @ratnerprestia.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 13/649,477 SUWA, YUTAKA
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`KIBROM T. HAILU its“ 2461
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from 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) MONTHS from 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, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/11/2012.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| 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 Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 1-12is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| Claim(s)_1-12 is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`iindex.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Xl The drawing(s) filed on 10/11/2012is/are: a)IXI accepted or b)|:l 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)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.IXI Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in 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)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) E InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20150306
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre—AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Double Patenting
`
`1.
`
`The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine
`
`grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or
`
`improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible
`
`harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate
`
`where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not
`
`patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either
`
`anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg,
`
`140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d
`
`2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van
`
`Ornnm, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619
`
`(CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
`
`A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may
`
`be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting
`
`ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with
`
`this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope
`
`of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR
`
`1.321(b).
`
`The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used.
`
`Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`form should be used. A web—based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online
`
`using web—screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto—processed and
`
`approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers,
`
`refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD—info—I.j sp.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 1—14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1—6
`
`and 8—16 of US. Patent No. 7,372,827 B2 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend
`
`the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
`
`The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is
`
`covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter.
`
`Furthermore, there is no apparent reason why applicant was prevented from presenting
`
`claims corresponding to those of the instant application during prosecution of the application
`
`which matured into a patent. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968).
`
`See also MPEP § 804.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 USC. 112:
`
`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.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 13 is rejected under 35 USC. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for
`
`failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as
`
`the invention.
`
`The phrase “Eye data” renders the claim indefinite because it is not quite clear what is
`
`being claimed. For the purpose of fiarther examination, “Eye data” is considered the same as
`
`“Eye diagram”. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre—AIA 35 USC. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousness rejections 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 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`6.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere C0., 383 US. l, 148 USPQ 459
`
`(1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre—
`
`AIA 35 USC. 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 present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1, 4 and 10 are rejected under pre—AIA 35 USC. 103(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Ala—Laurila et al. (US 6,477,156 B 1) in View of Awater et al. (US 7,046,649 B2).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Ala—Laurila discloses a radio communication apparatus for
`
`performing at least one of transmission and reception in a plurality of radio communication
`
`standards with a cordless handset (Abstract; col. 1, lines 6—17), the radio communication
`
`apparatus comprising: a radio unit configured to transmit and receive signals in a plurality of
`
`data formats (col. 1, lines 20—25, communication signals generated by the transmitting station are
`
`transmitted upon the communication channel to be received by the receiving station); and a
`
`controller configured to register an identifying information of the cordless handset received from
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`the cordless handset and discriminate whether the identifying information transmitted from the
`
`cordless handset is a specific information or not (col. 3, lines 41—50; col. 4, lines 4—11), wherein
`
`on receiving a connection request from the cordless handset in a first radio communication
`
`standard (col. 7, line 29—col. 8, line 8; col. 3, lines 41—50; col. 4, lines 4—11), the controller
`
`communicates with the cordless handset in the first radio communication standard when the
`
`identifying information is not the specific information, and the controller switches the first radio
`
`communication standard to a second radio communication standard which is different from the
`
`first radio communication standard (col. 4, lines 4—15), selects one of (A) a first data format and
`
`(B) a second data format when the identifying information is the specific information (figs. 2—4;
`
`col. 6, line 36—col. 8, line 8).
`
`Ala—Laurila doesn’t explicitly disclose a first data format not for performing error
`
`correction but for performing error detection of Payload and a second data format for performing
`
`the error detection and the error correction of the Payload and communicates with the cordless
`
`handset, when the identifying information is the specific information.
`
`Awater teaches a first data format including error detecting data for performing only error
`
`detection of Payload and (B) a second data format including error detecting data for performing
`
`the error detection and error correction of the Payload (col. 8, lines 54—57, a high—quality voice 1
`
`and 2 (HVl and HV2) packets use forward error correction where as HV3 does not use FEC at
`
`all, note also that the presence of error detection is obvious because CRC is a well known for
`
`detecting an error, see col. 9, lines 63—64 for the presence of CRC field in the packets).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use a first data format including error detecting data for performing only
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`error detection of Payload and (B) a second data format including error detecting data for
`
`performing the error detection and error correction of the Payload as taught by Awater into the
`
`radio communication system of Ala—Laurila in order to improve the quality of the data or voice.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Ala—Laurila discloses a second radio communication standard or
`
`mode (col. 4, lines 2—3).
`
`However, Ala—Laurila doesn’t disclose the second radio communication standard is one
`
`of (A) a first data format including error detecting data for performing only error detection of
`
`Payload and (B) a second data format including error detecting data for performing the error
`
`detection and error correction of the Payload.
`
`Awater teaches a high—quality voice 1 and 2 (HVl and HV2) packets use forward error
`
`correction where as HV3 does not use FEC at all (col. 8, lines 54—57, note also that the presence
`
`of error detection is obvious because CRC is a well known for detecting an error, see col. 9, lines
`
`63—64 for the presence of CRC field in the packets).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use packets having error correction as taught by Awater into the radio
`
`communication system of Ala—Laurila in order to improve the quality of the data or voice.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Ala—Laurila discloses a radio communication apparatus (col. 1,
`
`lines 5—6), further comprising a registering unit for registering the company identifying
`
`information transmitted from the counter radio apparatus (col. 7, lines 16—18, registration is done
`
`by inspecting the MAC address which the includes company identifiers), wherein said controller,
`
`on receiving the connection request from the counter radio apparatus in communication of a first
`
`radio communication standard, discriminates whether the transmitted company identifying
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`information is the specific information based on the information registered by said registering
`
`unit (col. 7, lines 18—24, 32—51).
`
`8.
`
`Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater, and in view of Orava et al. (US 6,829,288).
`
`Ala—Laurila discloses a radio communication apparatus (col. 1, lines 20—25).
`
`However, Ala—Laurila and Awater do not disclose said controller firstly performs a
`
`synchronization process in the first radio communication standard.
`
`Orava teaches performing a synchronization process in the first radio communication
`
`standard (col. 6, lines 4—6).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use first perform synchronization process as taught by Orava into Ala—
`
`Laurila and Awater in order to produce a packet bit stream conforming to the protocol version
`
`matched by simultaneous correlation (Orava, col. 6, lines 6—7).
`
`9.
`
`Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—
`
`Laurila in view of Awater, and further in view of Fujii et al. (7,110,392).
`
`Ala—Laurila discloses radio communication apparatus (col. 1, lines 20—25).
`
`However, Ala—Laurila doesn’t disclose in the first data format, data length of the Payload
`
`equals to that of Payload in the first radio communication standard and a slot interval is twice as
`
`long as that in the first radio communication standard; and in the second data format, data length
`
`of the Payload is a half of that of the Payload in the first radio communication standard and a slot
`
`interval is the same as that in the first radio communication standard.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`Awater teaches HVl, HV2 and HV3 packets have the same payload length (30 bytes or
`
`240 bits) and HV2 has twice slot interval than HVl, that is HVl is sent every other slot while
`
`HV2 is sent every four slots (col. 9, lines 24—43). Depending on the bit and forward error
`
`correction rate of a packet, the slot interval can be changed or varied.
`
`Fujii teaches a packet having a payload of a variable length (see fig. 4; col. 4, 47—50).
`
`Thus, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill to vary the payloads of the packets the
`
`same as the indicated claim limitations for transmission.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to vary the time intervals and the format of data payloads as taught by
`
`Awater and Fujii, and apply it to the radio communication of Ala—Laurila in order to avoid to
`
`interference or overlap of packets devices when transmitting at the same tine.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater, and further in view of Souissi (US 2002/0075941).
`
`Ala—Laurila discloses the first and second radio communication standards whereby by the
`
`transmitting station are transmitted upon the communication channel to be received by the
`
`receiving station (col. 1, lines 20—24).
`
`However, Ala—Laurila and Awater do not disclose selecting one of a plurality of channel
`
`options in the second radio communication standard to set a transmission power higher than that
`
`in the communication in the first radio communication standard.
`
`Souissi teaches selecting one of a plurality of channel options in the second radio
`
`communication standard to set a transmission power higher than that in the communication in the
`
`first radio communication standard (paragraphs [0046], [0060], explains switching between
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`different power levels in different modes or standards. The Bluetooth standard uses low power
`
`levels of transmitters, as low as lmW)
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use higher power transmission power as taught by Souissi into the second
`
`radio communication of Ala—Laurila to avoid collusion of messages.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater, and further in view of Bridgelall (US 6,895,255).
`
`Ala—Laurila discloses radio communication apparatus wherein first radio communication
`
`standard is IEEE 802.11 or MAC data format.
`
`However, Ala—Laurila doesn’t disclose the first radio communication apparatus is a
`
`Bluetooth data format.
`
`Bridgelall teaches dual mode data communication wherein one of the radio
`
`communication standards is a Bluetooth data format (co.1, lines 51—55).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use Bluetooth data format as the first radio communication standard as
`
`taught by Bridgelall into the radio communication system of Ala—Laurila in order to be able to
`
`use multi—mode systems so that the possibility of signal interference would be avoided.
`
`12.
`
`Claims 7—9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater, and further in view of Deboille et al. (US 6,717,926).
`
`Ala—Laurila discloses a radio communication apparatus wherein said radio
`
`communication apparatus performs at least one of transmission and reception of apparatus'
`
`peculiar ID from the counter radio apparatus (col. 1, lines 20—25), and said controller
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`discriminates whether a predetermined part of the peculiar ID includes a predetermined code,
`
`and performs a process in response to discrimination results (col. 6, lines 50—66, 41—42; col. 3,
`
`lines 43—45, the CDPDM—ES, cellular digital packet data—mobile endsystem number, is a unique
`
`address or number given to each device by the manufacturer included in the MAC address),
`
`Ala—Laurila and Awater do not explicitly disclose discriminating whether a specific
`
`communication function or a high—speed of 1 Mbps to 10 Mbps is supported, and a storing unit
`
`for storing the peculiar ID and the specific function when the peculiar ID is the specific ID and
`
`the counter radio apparatus supports the specific function.
`
`Deboille teaches supporting a specific communication function or transmitting data at a
`
`high—speed (col. 2, lines 46—49, explains high—speed data or bit rate at range of l to ll Mbps).
`
`Since the combination of Ala—Laurila and Deboille teaches the unique or peculiar ID (the address
`
`assigned by the manufacturer to each mobile terminal or device) and specific function or the
`
`high—speed data, it is obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to realize the existence
`
`of storage for storing the ID and specific function.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the radio communication of Deboille that supports a specific
`
`communication function or high—speed data transmission into the radio communication system of
`
`Ala—Laurila in order to transmit the radio signals or data in a more efficient manner, improved
`
`communication efficiency would result (Deboille, col. 2, lines 57—59).
`
`13.
`
`Claim ll is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater and Kraiem et al. (US 6,370,369), and further in view of Orava.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`As applied above, Ala—Laurila discloses radio communication apparatus registering the
`
`company id that is included in the MAC address, and communicating in the second radio
`
`communication standard and selects an option in response to the registered the company
`
`identifying information when the transmitted company identifying information is the specific
`
`information (col. 7, lines 16—23; col. 6, lines 1—9; col. 8, lines 1—8).
`
`However, the modified radio communication of Ala—Laurila does not disclose registering
`
`version information.
`
`Orava teaches supporting and/or registering multiple protocol versions and registering
`
`(col. 5, lines 64—col. 6, line 21; col. 11, lines 29—34, explains registering the latest and previous
`
`payload versions using registers 41 and 42).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use supporting and/or registering multiple protocols as taught by Orava
`
`into the modified radio communication system of Ala—Laurila by permitting linkup previous and
`
`latest protocols so that the devices with the new and old versions of the standards or protocols
`
`would be able to communicate to each other (Orava, col. 4, line 50—54).
`
`14.
`
`Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater, and further in view of Kraiem.
`
`As applied above, Ala—Laurila discloses a radio communication apparatus,
`
`However, Ala—Laurila and Awater do not disclose a burst received—data generator for
`
`outputting radio quality data by processing a received signal, wherein said controller switches at
`
`least one of antenna diversity and reception gain based on the radio quality data in the
`
`communication in the second radio communication standard.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`Kraiem teaches a burst received—data generator for outputting radio quality data by
`
`processing a received signal, wherein said controller switches at least one of antenna diversity
`
`and reception gain based on the radio quality data in the communication in the second radio
`
`communication standard (col. 1, lines 24—28,. . .on both transmit and receiving antenna diversity
`
`in wireless networks with direct mode is performed by switching between all transmit and
`
`receiving antennas in order to assess the provided radio link quality in all possible cases).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to apply the antenna diversity of
`
`that performs by switching between the
`
`antennas to assess the radio link quality into the radio communication system of Ala—Laurila in
`
`order to reduce the time to identify the best antenna pair in case of transmitting and receiving
`
`antenna diversity (Kraiem, col. 1, lines 43—45).
`
`15.
`
`Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater and Kraiem, and further in view of Yang (US 6,763,074).
`
`As applied above, the modified radio communication of Ala—Laurila discloas radio
`
`communication apparatus (col. 1, lines 20—25), wherein the radio quality data indicates received
`
`signal quality and received electric field strength (col. 1, lines 24—28,. . .on both transmit and
`
`receiving antenna diversity in wireless networks with direct mode is performed by switching
`
`between all transmit and receiving antennas in order to assess the provided radio link quality in
`
`all possible cases. Note also that to receive and detect the electric field strength is obvious).
`
`However, the modified radio communication system of Ala—Laurila doesn’t disclose
`
`includes Eye data of a received pulse generated during receiving Preamble in the communication
`
`in the second radio communication standard.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`Yang teaches Eye diagram or bit differential phase detector of a received pulse generated
`
`during receiving Preamble in the communication in the second radio communication standard
`
`(col. 6, lines 36—58; col. 8, lines 53-59).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use Eye diagram of acceptable bit differential phase detectors as taught by
`
`Yang into the modified radio communication of Ala—Laurila so that the system would not be
`
`more susceptible to noise or interference.
`
`16.
`
`Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ala—Laurila in
`
`view of Awater and Kraiem, and further in view of Mnhany (US 5,748,676).
`
`As applied above, the combined radio communication of Ala—Laurila and Kraiem
`
`discloses radio communication apparatus, wherein said radio communication apparatus, on
`
`discriminating that a counter terminal is a company's own product based on information
`
`communicated in connection in the first radio communication standard, switches the standard to
`
`the second radio communication standard both on a transmission side and a reception side, and
`
`determines the radio quality data indicating quality of a received pulse.
`
`Ala—Laurila, Awater and Kraiem fail to teach receiving electric field strength by adding a
`
`bit number of Preamble in the communication in the second radio communication standard.
`
`Mahany teaches a transceiver adds a specific preamble bit sequence to each packet of
`
`data to be transmitted for antenna diversity protocol (col. 1, lines 31—42; col. 14, lines 28—37 or
`
`fig. 11).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`invention was made to use the antenna diversity of Mahany that teaches adding a specific
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`preamble bit sequence each communication packet into the modified radio communication
`
`system of Ala—Laurila so that false indication of the beginning of the communication packet
`
`content can be prevented.
`
`Conclusion
`
`17.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to KIBROM T. HAILU Whose telephone number is (571)270—1209.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on Monday—Thursday 8:30AM—6z00PM.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Huy D. Vu can be reached on (571)272—3155. 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). 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.
`
`/KIBROM T HAILU/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/649,477
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 2461
`
`