Ex Parte Leong et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardAug 25, 2017

14446612 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 25, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O.Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 14/446,612 07/30/2014 Frank Harald Erich Ho Chung Leong 81639412US01 9602 65913 7590 08/29/2017 Intellectual Property and Licensing NXPB.V. 411 East Plumeria Drive, MS41 SAN JOSE, CA 95134 EXAMINER AHN, SUNG S ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2631 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 08/29/2017 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): ip. department .u s @ nxp. com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte FRANK HARALD ERICH HO CHUNG LEONG, ARIE GEERT CORNELIUS KOPPELAAR, STEFAN DRUDE and ANDRIES PETER HEKSTRA Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,6121 Technology Center 2600 Before MARC S. HOFF, JAMES R. HUGHES and MATTHEW J. McNEILL, Administrative Patent Judges. HOFF, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a Final Rejection of claims 1—21. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. Appellants’ invention is a receiver including a tuner receiving an input signal; a signal processor configured to process the input signal; an automatic gain control (AGC) controller configured to initialize the receiver in a low gain state, determine the presence of a signal, and increase the 1 The real party in interest is NXP B.V. Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal. See Abstract. Claim 1 is exemplary of the claims on appeal: 1. A receiver, comprising: a tuner configured to receive an input signal; a signal processor configured to process the input signal; an automatic gain control (AGC) controller configured to: initialize the receiver in a low gain state; determine a presence of the input signal; and increase receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal. The Examiner relies upon the following prior art in rejecting the claims on appeal: Ishihara US 2005/0221778 A1 Oct. 6, 2005 Hanetal. US 2011/0026571 A1 Feb. 3,2011 Aoki et al. US 2005/0163081 A1 July 28, 2005 Claims 1,3,8, 10—12, 14, and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ishihara. Claims 2 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ishihara and Han. Claims 4—7, 9, 15—18, 20, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ishihara and Aoki. Throughout this decision, we make reference to the Appeal Brief (“App. Br.,” filed April 1, 2016), the Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed October 31, 2016), and the Examiner’s Answer (“Ans.,” mailed October 18, 2016) for their respective details. 2 Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 ISSUES 1. Does Ishihara teach an AGC controller configured to initialize the receiver in a low gain state; determine a presence of the input signal; and increase receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal? 2. Does Ishihara teach an AGC controller configured to initialize the receiver in a high gain state, and lock onto a weak portion of the input signal when the input signal includes both the weak portion and a strong portion, wherein the weak portion is received prior to the strong portion? ANALYSIS Claims 1,3, 8,10-12,14, and 19 Independent claim 1 recites a receiver, comprising an automatic gain control (AGC) controller configured to “increase receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal.” Independent claim 12 recites a receiver, comprising an AGC controller configured to “lock onto a weak portion of the input signal when the input signal includes the weak portion and a strong portion, wherein the weak portion is received prior to the strong portion.” Support for the language of claims 1 and 12 is found at paragraphs 36 and 40 of the Specification: The receiver starts in a low gain configuration. When the second set of pulses is received the receiver locks onto the strong reflected pulse. The receiver then may transition into the high gain state. When the next pair of pulses is received, this results in the clipping in the receiver when the strong reflected pulse is received. Then when the next pair of pulses is received, the receiver locks onto the weak LOS pulse and the receiver is clipped when the strong reflected pulse is received. The 3 Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 receiver continues to operate in the high gain state because it has locked on to a weaker pulse that is received earlier in time, indicating that it is the LOS pulse rather than a reflected pulse. Spec. 136. [W]hen the second set of pulses is received the receiver locks onto the weak LOS pulse and still clips the strong reflected pulse. The receiver continues to operate in the high gain state because it has locked on to a weaker pulse that is received earlier in time, indicating that it is the LOS pulse rather than a reflected pulse. Spec. 140. The Examiner finds that Ishihara anticipates the claimed invention. In finding that Ishihara teaches “increase the receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal,” the Examiner cites to Figures 3, 4, and 7, and paragraphs 3, 6, 95, and 98 of Ishihara. Ans. 3. Figure 3 is a graph showing frames in the compressed mode. Ishihara 123. Figure 3 does not illustrate receiver gain. Figure 4 shows the arrangement of the main part of the automatic gain control device. Ishihara 124. Gain is set by digital to analog converter (DAC) 407. Increase and decrease of the amplifier gain is discussed, but there is no mention of determining the presence of a weak signal prior to a strong signal. See Ishihara 57, 58. Figure 7 is a timing chart showing the operation of the automatic gain control device. Ishihara 127. Referring to the time zone 705 between time tO and time tl, Ishihara teaches that: [i]n this case, the electric field level 701 increases with time as, for example, the radio communication terminal 100 4 Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 moves. Since the automatic gain control device controls output values from the amplifier to become constant, the gain setting value of the amplifier 403 decreases as the electric field level 701 increases. Ishihara 195. “Owing to automatic gain control, at time t2, the gain setting value of the amplifier 403 almost converges to the optimal value. Thereafter, owing to automatic gain control, the electric field level 702 decreases, and at the same time, the gain setting value 704 increases.” Ishihara 198. Paragraph 3 of Ishihara generally describes converting a received radio signal from analog to digital form. Paragraph 6 of Ishihara discusses the need for an automatic gain control circuit in order “to stably hold a constant amplifier output even at the time of such a change in environment.” None of the portions of Ishihara cited by the Examiner teaches an AGC controller configured to increase receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal, as independent claim 1 recites. None of the cited portions of Ishihara teaches an AGC controller configured to lock onto a weak portion of the input signal when the input signal includes both the weak portion and a strong portion, wherein the weak portion is received prior to the strong portion, as independent claim 12 recites. We find that Ishihara fails to teach all the limitations of independent claims 1 and 12. We agree with Appellants that the Examiner erred in rejecting independent claims 1 and 12, as well as dependent claims 3, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 19, as being anticipated by Ishihara. We, therefore, do not sustain the Examiner’s § 102(a)(2) rejection. 5 Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 Claims 2,4-7,9,13,15-18,20, and 21 Claims 2 and 13 depend from respective independent claims 1 and 12, and stand rejected under § 103(a) as unpatentable over Ishihara and Han. We have reviewed Han and we agree with Appellants that Han does not remedy the deficiencies of Ishihara, mentioned supra. Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of claims 2 and 13. Claims 4—7, 9 depend from independent claim 1, and claims 15—18, 20, and 21 depend from independent claim 12. These claims stand rejected under § 103(a) as unpatentable over Ishihara and Aoki. We have reviewed Aoki and we agree with Appellants that Aoki does not remedy the deficiencies of Ishihara, mentioned supra. Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of claims 2 and 13. CONCLUSIONS 1. Ishihara does not teach an AGC controller configured to initialize the receiver in a low gain state; determine a presence of the input signal; and increase receiver gain to determine if a weak signal is present prior to a strong signal within the input signal. 2. Ishihara does not teach an AGC controller configured to initialize the receiver in a high gain state, and lock onto a weak portion of the input signal when the input signal includes both the weak portion and a strong portion, wherein the weak portion is received prior to the strong portion. 6 Appeal 2017-001420 Application 14/446,612 ORDER The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1—21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed. REVERSED 7