DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s 06/17/2026 Amendments/Arguments, which directly amended claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 15, 17; and traversed the rejections of the claims of the 12/17/2025 Office Action are acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 8-9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carbajal (US 2015/0056926 which was cited in previous Office Action).
Carbajal
PNG
media_image1.png
448
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
688
442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Carbajal discloses in Fig 1 and 2A above an apparatus (i.e. a spectrum management device 102, 202) for determining locations of radio frequency emitters comprising:
at least one software defined radio (SDR) (i.e. “Data may be collected from known signals or unknown signals and time spaced in order to provide expedient information. I/Q sampled data may contain raw signal data that may be used to demodulate and translate signals by streaming them to a signal analyzer or to a real-time demodulator software defined radio that may have the newly identified signal parameters for the signal of interest. The inherent nature of the input RF allows for any type of signal to be analyzed and demodulated based on the reconfiguration of the software defined radio interfaces.”) ([0067]) configured to collect radio frequency (RF) emission information by sweeping through one or more RF frequencies (i.e. The wireless environment 100 may include various sources 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, and 114 generating various radio frequency (RF) signals 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126. As an example, mobile devices 104 may generate cellular RF signals 116, such as CDMA, GSM, 3G signals, etc. As another example, wireless access devices 106, such as Wi-Fi.RTM. routers, may generate RF signals 118, such as Wi-Fi.RTM. signals. As a further example, satellites 108, such as communication satellites or GPS satellites, may generate RF signals 120, such as satellite radio, television, or GPS signals. As a still further example, base stations 110, such as a cellular base station, may generate RF signals 122, such as CDMA, GSM, 3G signals, etc. As another example, radio towers 112, such as local AM or FM radio stations, may generate RF signals 124, such as AM or FM radio signals. As another example, government service provides 114, such as police units, fire fighters, military units, air traffic control towers, etc. may generate RF signals 126, such as radio communications, tracking signals, etc. The various RF signals 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126 may be generated at different frequencies, power levels, in different protocols, with different modulations, and at different times. The various sources 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, and 114 may be assigned frequency bands, power limitations, or other restrictions, requirements, and/or licenses by a government spectrum control entity, such as a the FCC. However, with so many different sources 104, 106, 108, 110, 112, and 114 generating so many different RF signals 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, overlaps, interference, and/or other problems may occur. A spectrum management device 102 in the wireless environment 100 may measure the RF energy in the wireless environment 100 across a wide spectrum and identify the different RF signals 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126 which may be present in the wireless environment 100. The identification and cataloging of the different RF signals 116, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126 which may be present in the wireless environment 100 may enable the spectrum management device 102 to determine available frequencies for use in the wireless environment 100. In addition, the spectrum management device 102 may be able to determine if there are available frequencies for use in the wireless environment 100 under certain conditions (i.e., day of week, time of day, power level, frequency band, etc.). In this manner, the RF spectrum in the wireless environment 100 may be managed.”) ([0079]) and record RF signal amplitude sensed for each of the one or more RF frequencies and record geolocations and time stamps associated with each recorded RF signal amplitude (i.e. “For example, the information stored in static database may be used to determine the spectral density, center frequency, bandwidth, baud rate, modulation type, protocol (e.g., GSM, CDMA, OFDM, LTE, etc.), system or carrier using licensed spectrum, location of the signal source, and a timestamp the signal of interest.”) ([0072]) (“In an embodiment, the processor 214 may determine the location of the spectrum management device 202 based on a location input, such as GPS coordinates, received from a location receiver, such as a GPS receiver 212. In block 304 the processor 214 may determine the time. As an example, the time may be the current clock time as determined by the processor 214 and may be a time associated with receiving RF measurements. In block 306 the processor 214 may receive RF energy measurements. In an embodiment, the processor 214 may receive RF energy measurements from an RF receiver 210. In block 308 the processor 214 may convert the RF energy measurements to spectral representation data. As an example, the processor may apply a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to the RF energy measurements to convert them to spectral representation data. In optional block 310 the processor 214 may display the spectral representation data on a display 242 of the spectrum management device 202, such as in a graph illustrating amplitudes across a frequency spectrum.”) ([0086]); and
at least one processor (i.e. signal processor 214) configured to process the collected RF emission information to determine locations of one or more RF emitters based on the recorded signal amplitudes, geolocations, and time stamps ([0081]-[0084]); (“In an embodiment, the processor 214 may determine the location of the spectrum management device 202 based on a location input, such as GPS coordinates, received from a location receiver, such as a GPS receiver 212. In block 304 the processor 214 may determine the time. As an example, the time may be the current clock time as determined by the processor 214 and may be a time associated with receiving RF measurements. In block 306 the processor 214 may receive RF energy measurements. In an embodiment, the processor 214 may receive RF energy measurements from an RF receiver 210. In block 308 the processor 214 may convert the RF energy measurements to spectral representation data. As an example, the processor may apply a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to the RF energy measurements to convert them to spectral representation data. In optional block 310 the processor 214 may display the spectral representation data on a display 242 of the spectrum management device 202, such as in a graph illustrating amplitudes across a frequency spectrum.”) ([0086]).
While patent drawings are not drawn to scale, relationships clearly shown in the drawings of a reference patent cannot be disregarded in determining the patentability of claims. See In re Mraz, 59 CCPA 866, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (1972).
Regarding claim 2, Carbajal discloses the at least one processor configured to sort and clean the collected radio frequency (RF) emission information to eliminate invalid or erroneous data associated with the collection of the radio frequency (RF) emission information ([0084]; [0087]-[0088]).
Regarding claims 8-9 and 15, the claims are directed toward a method and product that is performed by the apparatus as claimed in claims 1-2. The cited portions of Carbajal used in the rejection of claims 1-2 disclose where the apparatus performs the claimed method as cited in claim 8-9 and 15. Therefore, claims 8-9 and 15 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 1-2 stated above.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-4, 10-11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carbajal in view of Westcott et al (US 2014/0327571 which was cited in previous Office Action).
Westcott et al
PNG
media_image3.png
404
646
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 3-4, Carbajal disclose in Fig 2A above at least one memory device (i.e. memory 230) communicatively coupled to the at least one processor ([0083]). Carbajal does not explicitly disclose the at least one processor further configured to: produce at least one meshed grid in the at least one memory device, the at least one meshed grid including the geospatial information including recorded latitude and longitude values to establish grid vectors; determine one or more boundary conditions within the meshed grid to produce coordinates of a rectangular grid (X, Y) based on at least one of maximum and minimum of recorded latitude and longitude values; and produce at least one of two-dimensional and three-dimensional representations of the collected radio frequency (RF) emission information based the meshed grid as claimed.
Westcott et al teach in the same field of endeavor in Fig 4 above the at least one processor (i.e. processor, microprocessor) ([0028]; [0133]) configured to: produce at least one meshed grid in the at least one memory device, the at least one meshed grid including the geospatial information including recorded latitude and longitude values to establish grid vectors; determine one or more boundary conditions within the meshed grid to produce coordinates of a rectangular grid (X, Y) based on at least one of maximum and minimum of recorded latitude and longitude values; and produce at least one of two-dimensional and three-dimensional representations of the collected radio frequency (RF) emission information based the meshed grid ([0105]-[0106]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carbajal in view of Westcott et al by incorporating such processor configured to: produce at least one meshed grid in the at least one memory device, the at least one meshed grid including the geospatial information including recorded latitude and longitude values to establish grid vectors; determine one or more boundary conditions within the meshed grid to produce coordinates of a rectangular grid (X, Y) based on at least one of maximum and minimum of recorded latitude and longitude values; and produce at least one of two-dimensional and three-dimensional representations of the collected radio frequency (RF) emission information based the meshed grid as taught by Westcott et al to gain advantage of properly determining locations of the emitters; and also since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
While patent drawings are not drawn to scale, relationships clearly shown in the drawings of a reference patent cannot be disregarded in determining the patentability of claims. See In re Mraz, 59 CCPA 866, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (1972).
Regarding claims 10-11 and 16-17, the claims are directed toward a method and product that is performed by the apparatus as claimed in claims 3-4. The cited portions of Carbajal in view of Westcott used in the rejection of claims 3-4 disclose where the apparatus performs the claimed method as cited in claim 10-11 and 16-17. Therefore, claims 10-11 and 16-17 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 3-4 stated above.
Claims 5-7, 12-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carbajal.
Regarding claims 5-7, Carbajal does not explicitly disclose utilizing a k-mean clustering process/algorithm to process the collected RF emission information for determining locations of the emitters as claimed. However, it is well known in the art of experimentation that one derives his or her own formulation to operate a system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a k-mean clustering process/algorithm to process the collected RF emission information in the system of Carbajal for determining locations of the emitters, since it is well known in the art to derive a mathematical (algorithm, formula, equation) to operate a system.
Regarding claims 12-14, and 18-20, the claims are rejected for similar reasons as stated in claims 5-7 above.
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/17/2026, with respect to 35 USC 101 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 with respect to 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 rejection based on the prior art of US 2015/0056926 to Carbajal alone and in the combination have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Carbajal does not disclose “determine locations of one or more RF emitters based on the recorded signal amplitudes…” as claimed.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because as stated in section 18 of the previous 12/17/2025 Office Action and in section 10 above, while every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI. Examiner has revised the rejection to include paragraph [0086] of Carbajal. By revising the rejection, Examiner has shown that paragraph [0086] of Carbajal does teach that locations of one or more RF emitters are determined based on the recorded signal amplitudes along with geolocations, and time stamps as claimed. Therefore, the rejections are sustained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 10,231,206 discloses apparatus and methods for identifying a wireless signal-emitting device. The apparatus is configured to sense and measure wireless communication signals from signal-emitting devices in a spectrum. The apparatus is operable to automatically detect a signal of interest from the wireless signal-emitting device and create a signal profile of the signal of interest; compare the signal profile with stored device signal profiles for identification of the wireless signal-emitting device; and calculate signal degradation data for the signal of interest based on information associated with the signal of interest in a static database including noise figure parameters of a wireless signal-emitting device outputting the signal of interest. The signal profile of the signal of interest, profile comparison result, and signal degradation data are stored in the apparatus.
US 8,373,596 discloses techniques that allow for the detection and locating of RF emitters. The technique includes recording emitter signals of interest received from the search area via an antenna array and a phase coherent receiver, wherein all frequency conversions carried out by the phase coherent receiver are performed in a phase coherent fashion across all the channels. The technique further includes identifying subspace of each channel using singular value decomposition (SVD), analyzing the subspace of each channel for the presence of a target signal, and direction finding and/or geolocating the target signal.
US 2004/0233100 discloses a system and method for detecting the position of a remote emitter where the emitter is emitting a radio frequency signal in a radio field. The system and method uses at least one receiver which is moveable within the environment of the radio field, each receiver measuring and recording the amplitude of the radio frequency signal and recording its precise location using a GNSS or GPS receiver. The data recorded is processed and compared to data predicted by the receiver(s) to estimate a location of remote emitter.
WO 2022/125091 discloses geolocating one or more emitters includes obtaining a set of lines of bearing (LOBs) indicative of location(s) of emitter(s), determining intersections of LOBs of the set and generating clusters informed by those intersections, assigning the LOBs of the set to cluster(s) based on proximity, identifying a cluster having the greatest number of assigned LOBs from the set; determining an emitter location area based on a best point estimate for the cluster, and indicating a location of an emitter as the emitter location area. Additional emitters can be located by removing from the set of LOBs those LOBs assigned to the identified cluster, and repeating aforementioned aspects. Initially, the set of LOBs can be selected from a larger collection as a representative subset thereof.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHUONG P NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3445. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10:00-10:00 EST.
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) 272-6878. 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.
/CHUONG P NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
