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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant discussed “The schematic below illustrates the typical steps
involved in conventional systems for the transmission of voice from a Terminal 900 over an LMR bearer (I or II)… (pages 6-7 of applicant’s remarks)” however, this system discussed by the applicant is not discussed, mentioned or shown in Janky.
The applicant argues “Janky teaches decoding and re-encoding of the LMR content based on the type of vocoder, as discussed in col. 4, lines 27-31:… Therefore, Janky decodes and recodes signals during processing in the transcoder.” See page 8 of applicant’s remarks. The examiner disagrees.
Janky teaches in the various embodiments, the transcoder 28 transmits transcoded voice packet to a final destination, for example, to a base station within the second LMR network 26…For example, the transcoder 28 operates to decode and re-encode the LMR content based on the type of vocoder from which the LMR content was received and the type of vocoder to which the LMR content is to be transmitted. See col. 4, lines 11-48. Therefore, Janky does teach an embodiment where the transcoder 28 operates to decode and re-encode the LMR content based on the type of vocoder.
Janky teaches another embodiment discussing the LMR content 60 is essentially digitally encoded and encrypted, for example, in an IP encoded/encrypted format such that the processor 44 may convert and/or translate (in other words, data/packet is processed by the first radio or second radio as described in applicant’s claims) from one encoding/encryption scheme to another so that the LMR content 60 may be transmitted from one LMR network to another LMR network, thereby allowing users with different vocoders to communicate with each other. Janky further teaches the transcoder 28 translates (e.g., digitally converts) the packets (in other words, data/packet is processed by the first radio or second radio as described in applicant’s claims), for example, a message 76 from a first LMR communication protocol (e.g., first encoding and encryption scheme) to a second LMR communication protocol corresponding to the first and second types of sites/base stations 72 and 74, respectively. Essentially, the transcoder 28 receives the message 76 with instructions or commands to translate the message 76 and forward the message 76 to a particular destination, for example, a base station in one of the two LMR systems. The transcoding may be performed in different manners as described herein to provide the translation from one LMR format to another LMR format. See col. 4, lines 54-col. 5, line 29.
Janky teaches an embodiment that does not discuss decrypting data/packets therefore, it can be said that Janky does not teach away from data/packets being processed, converted, translated or converted without decrypting.
Applicant’s arguments (page 8 of applicant’s remarks) with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 8-9, 12-14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janky et al. (Janky), U.S. Patent No. 8,169,983 in view of Yu et al. (Yu), U.S. Publication No. 2010/0232546.
Regarding Claim 1, Janky discloses a Land Mobile Radio (LMR) repeater (LMR
Unit shown in figure 1), comprising:
a first radio operating with a first LMR protocol (i.e., a first LMR
communication protocol; see col. 5, lines 19-20), and
a second radio operating with a second LMR protocol (i.e., a second LMR
communication protocol; see col. 5, lines 21-22);
wherein a signal containing packets of voice data LMR encoded using the first
LMR protocol received by the first radio, is processed by the first radio or the second radio, and is transmitted by the second radio as a signal LMR encoded using the second LMR protocol containing the packets of voice data encoded using the first protocol (in other words, the LMR content generally includes an LMR data portion and a header/encapsulation portion. The LMR content, for example, LMR voice packets may be formatted as shown in FIG. 3. In particular, the LMR content 60 may include an encoder protocol header 62, an encryption protocol header 64, and LMR data 66, for example, an LMR payload. The LMR content 60 is essentially digitally encoded and encrypted, for example, in an IP encoded/encrypted format such that the processor 44 may convert and/or translate from one encoding/encryption scheme to another so that the LMR content 60 may be transmitted from one LMR network to another LMR network; see col. 4, line 54-col. 5, line 29); and
wherein a signal containing packets of voice data LMR encoded using the
second LMR protocol received by the second radio, is processed by the first radio or the second radio, and transmitted by the first radio as a signal LMR encoded using the first LMR protocol containing the packets of voice data encoded using the second LMR protocol (in other words, the LMR content generally includes an LMR data portion and a header/encapsulation portion. The LMR content, for example, LMR voice packets may be formatted as shown in FIG. 3. In particular, the LMR content 60 may include an encoder protocol header 62, an encryption protocol header 64, and LMR data 66, for example, an LMR payload. The LMR content 60 is essentially digitally encoded and encrypted, for example, in an IP encoded/encrypted format such that the processor 44 may convert and/or translate from one encoding/encryption scheme to another so that the LMR content 60 may be transmitted from one LMR network to another LMR network; see col. 4, line 54-col. 5, line 29).
Janky fails to disclose without decrypting the voice data.
Yu discloses without decrypting the voice data (i.e., a layer one relay node is essentially a repeater that can retransmit a transmission without any modification other than amplification and slight delay. Therefore, Yu teaches a repeater having the ability to transmit without any modifications which is considered as not decrypting the data before transmission whereas a layer two relay node demodulates and decodes) See paragraph [0018].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Yu’s invention with Janky’s invention for functioning as a basic amplifier that indiscriminately boosts the electrical or radio signal it receives (as mentioned in an online article written by an engineer Liam Cope).
Regarding Claim 12, Janky discloses a method of operating a Land Mobile
Radio (LMR) repeater (LMR Unit shown in figure 1), comprising:
providing a repeater as a combination of a first mobile radio and a second mobile radio (i.e., a first LMR network 24 (LMR Network 1) and a second LMR network 26 (LMR Network 2). For example, the first LMR network 24 may be configured to provide communication using an APCO Project 25 standard/protocol and the second LMR network 26 may be configured to provide communication using a TETRA standard/protocol therefore, a first mobile radio and a second mobile radio is required; see col. 3, lines 16-24 and figure 1),
receiving a first RF signal at the first radio, wherein the first RF signal contains
voice data LMR encoded (i.e., the LMR content 60 is essentially digitally encoded and encrypted; see col. 4, line 54-col. 5, line 29) using a first LMR protocol (i.e., a first LMR communication protocol; see col. 5, lines 19-20),
encoding the received first RF signal in the first mobile radio or the second
mobile radio (i.e., the processor 44 may convert and/or translate from one encoding/encryption scheme to another; see col. 4, line 54-col. 5, line 29) using a second LMR protocol (i.e., a second LMR communication protocol; see col. 5, lines 21-22), and
transmitting a second RF signal from the second radio, containing the received signal as encoded using the second LMR protocol (i.e., the LMR content 60 may be transmitted from one LMR network to another LMR network; see col. 4, line 54-col. 5, line 29).
Janky fails to disclose without decrypting or devocoding the voice data encoded using the first LMR protocol.
Yu discloses without decrypting or devocoding the voice data encoded using the first LMR protocol (i.e., a layer one relay node is essentially a repeater that can retransmit a transmission without any modification other than amplification and slight delay. Therefore, Yu teaches a repeater having the ability to transmit without any modifications which is considered as not decrypting the data before transmission whereas a layer two relay node demodulates and decodes) See paragraph [0018].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Yu’s invention with Janky’s invention for functioning as a basic amplifier that indiscriminately boosts the electrical or radio signal it receives (as mentioned in an online article written by an engineer Liam Cope).
Regarding Claim 8, Janky and Yu disclose the repeater as described above.
Janky further discloses wherein the first LMR protocol used for LMR encoding or LMR decoding the voice data is P25 Phase II and the second LMR protocol used for LMR encoding or LMR decoding the voice data is P25 Phase I (see col. 5, lines 30-45).
Regarding Claim 9, Janky and Yu disclose the repeater as described above.
Janky further discloses wherein the voice data is encrypted or unencrypted voice data (see col. 6, lines 1-8).
Regarding Claim 13, Janky and Yu disclose the method as described above.
Janky further discloses wherein the first LMR protocol is P25 Phase II and the second LMR protocol is P25 Phase I, so that the RF signal transmitted by the second radio is a P25 Phase I signal containing packets of P25 Phase II signal (see col. 5, lines 30-45).
Regarding Claim 14, Janky and Yu disclose the method as described above.
Janky further discloses wherein the first LMR protocol is P25 Phase I and the second LMR protocol is P25 Phase II, so that the RF signal transmitted by the second radio is a P25 Phase II signal containing packets of P25 Phase I signal (see col. 5, lines 30-45).
Regarding Claim 17, Janky and Yu disclose the method as described above.
Janky further discloses wherein voice data received at the repeater is encrypted voice data (see col. 6, lines 1-8), and wherein the encrypted voice data during operation of the repeater (see col. 6, lines 1-8). Janky fails to disclose is not decrypted. Yu discloses is not decrypted (i.e., a layer one relay node is essentially a repeater that can retransmit a transmission without any modification other than amplification and slight delay. Therefore, Yu teaches a repeater having the ability to transmit without any modifications which is considered as not decrypting the data before transmission whereas a layer two relay node demodulates and decodes) See paragraph [0018]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Yu’s invention with Janky’s invention for functioning as a basic amplifier that indiscriminately boosts the electrical or radio signal it receives (as mentioned in an online article written by an engineer Liam Cope).
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janky and Yu in view of Gao et al. (Gao), U.S. Publication No. 2017/0148463.
Regarding Claim 15, Janky and Yu disclose the method wherein the voice data received at the first mobile radio has been vocoded and LMR encoded using P25 Phase I as described above. Janky and Yu fail to disclose using an IMBE vocoder. Gao discloses using an IMBE vocoder (see paragraph [0063]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Gao’s invention with Janky’s and Yu’s invention for improving the quality and intelligibility of vocoded speech providing an improved performance and marketing advantage (see paragraph [0063] of Gao).
Regarding Claim 16, Janky and Yu disclose the method wherein the voice data received at the first mobile radio has been vocoded and LMR encoded using P25 Phase II as described above. Janky and Yu fail to disclose using an AMBE vocoder. Gao discloses using an AMBE vocoder (see paragraph [0063]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Gao’s invention with Janky’s and Yu’s invention for improving the quality and intelligibility of vocoded speech providing an improved performance and marketing advantage (see paragraph [0063] of Gao).
Conclusion
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 shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANTELL LAKETA HEIBER whose telephone number is (571)272-0886. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Addy, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-0886. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SHANTELL L HEIBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
May 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights