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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 08/19/2026. Claims 1-12 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 08/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner thoroughly reviewed Applicant’s arguments but firmly believes that the cited reference reasonably and properly meets the claimed limitation as rejected.
Applicant’s arguments: It appears that the proposed reconstruction relies on the present application as a roadmap. Neither Gundel nor Jann identifies the claimed receipt and amplification of RF control signals as a design objective. Gundel does not disclose the RF-control-signal limitation, as the Office Action acknowledges. Jann does not disclose that its feedback data or DPD coefficients are RF control signals amplified through the RF front end. Only after reviewing claim 1 could one select: Gundel's RF front end, transmit and receive paths, gain components, and power amplifiers, Jann's RF transmit signal, Jann's feedback measurements, Jann's digital DPD coefficients, Jann's use of processing circuitry to "control" DFE selection, and the present application's claimed relationship among these features, and reconstruct the asserted mapping. The cited references themselves do not provide that relationship. The rejection, therefore, relies on the present application as a roadmap for combining distinct signals and functions.
For at least these reasons, Gundel and Jann do not establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to claim 1. Withdrawal of the rejection of claim 1 is respectfully requested.
The examiner’s response: In response to applicant's argument that “The cited references themselves do not provide that relationship. The rejection, therefore, relies on the present application as a roadmap for combining distinct signals and functions”, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Gundel discloses the claimed invention except RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals. Jann discloses RF radio system comprising plurality transceiver wherein digital predistortion (DPD) coefficients are adjusted for each transmit path ([0286]) and per-transmit chain DPD may advantageously function to maintain the correction on non-linearities over each of the N antenna elements ([0291]). Jann discloses receives RF control signals (DPD coefficient), and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit (DPD coefficients are calculated and adjusted) and receive chains to generate power from each chain (DPD coefficients are applied to TX signals). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the teaching taught by Jann with the teaching by Gundel to further improve MIMO signal transmission quality.
Applicant’s arguments: Claim 3 requires: "a plurality of observation chains configured as Digital Predistortion (DPD) feedback paths from one or more Power Amplifiers (PAs) of the RFEM board to one or more Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) of a high speed transceiver board (HSTB) for linearization."
The Office Action maps Gundel's DPD calibration feedback path 231 to the claimed observation chain and maps an RFSoC of set 260 to the claimed FPGA of the HSTB.
Gundel's feedback path 231 is routed from directional coupler 225 through attenuator 230 and switch 253 toward the receive side of an RFSoC. Gundel does not disclose that the feedback path extends to one or more FPGAs of an HSTB.
An RFSoC is not an FPGA of an HSTB merely because the RFSoC may contain digital processing circuitry. The rejection must establish the claimed structural relationship among the RFEM board, the observation chains, and the FPGAs of the HSTB. The cited portions of Gundel do not disclose that relationship.
Further, the Office Action identifies attenuator 230 as corresponding to the claimed power amplifier. An attenuator is not a power amplifier. Although Gundel separately depicts power amplifier 221, the cited mapping does not establish the complete claimed feedback path from a PA of the RFEM board to an FPGA of an HSTB.
Jann does not cure these deficiencies. Jann's use of shared and per-chain DFEs for DPD processing does not disclose observation chains extending from PAs of an RFEM board to FPGAs of an HSTB. Accordingly, claim 3 is patentable over Gundel in view of Jann.
The examiner’s response: Gundel discloses a plurality of observation chain (plurality of TX RX pairs, Figure 3A) configured as Digital Predistortion (DPD) feedback paths (DPD F/B 231, Figure 3B) from Power Amplifier (PA) (PA 221 from TX 290, Figure 3B) of the front end to field programmable gage arrays of a high speed transceiver board for linearization (DPD function).
Applicant’s arguments: Claim 8 requires the RFEM board to comprise a plurality of layers having a receiver section that receives RF signals from a UE, decodes the received RF signals, converts the decoded RF signals into digital signals, and transmits the digital signals to upper layers having RF connectors.
The Office Action maps Gundel's BBU to the claimed upper layers. However, a BBU located elsewhere in a radio-system architecture is not a disclosure of upper layers of the RFEM board having RF connectors.
The cited portions of Gundel also do not disclose a plurality of layers of the RFEM board, a receiver section provided in those layers, decoding of the received RF signals in the receiver section, conversion of the decoded signals into digital signals, and transmission of the digital signals to upper RFEM-board layers having RF connectors.
The examiner’s response: Gundel discloses wherein the RFEM board comprises a plurality of layers having a receiver section to receive RF signals from a user equipment (UE) (each receiver-path interpreted as each layer) and decode the received RF signals in the receiver section using receivers that form part of the plurality of receive chains (multiple receiver-paths from receive chains), based on which the decoded RF signals are converted into digital signals and transmitted to upper layers having RF connectors (BBU converted received signals to digital signals).
Applicant’s arguments: Claim 10 requires: "the RFEM board is blind mated with the HSTB to remove complexity of cable routing and avoid RF signal oscillations"
Gundel does not disclose an RFEM board blind mated with an HSTB. The Office Action instead states generally that blind-mate connections were known for interconnecting circuit boards without cables.
The Office Action provides no reference or other evidence establishing the claimed blind- mate arrangement. It also does not explain why a skilled artisan would blind mate the particular RFEM board and HSTB or how that arrangement would avoid RF signal oscillations.
Further, Gundel does not disclose the claimed HSTB underlying claim 3. Adding an unspecified blind-mate connector to Gundel therefore would not result in an RFEM board blind mated with the claimed HSTB.
The rejection also does not address the complete limitation. At most, the asserted general knowledge concerns removal of cables. It does not establish that the proposed RFEM-to-HSTB blind-mate arrangement would avoid RF signal oscillations as recited in claim 10.
The examiner’s response: It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize blind mate connection to connect circuit board since it was known in the art that blind mated connection are use to interconnect circuit board without cable. The removal of cables that are closely cluttered results in less RF signal interference.
Applicant’s arguments: Claim 11 recites a UE communicatively coupled with an RFEM board, the UE comprising: "one or more primary processors communicatively coupled to one or more processors of a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radio unit through a network, the one or more primary processors coupled with a memory, wherein said memory stores instructions which when executed by the one or more primary processors cause the UE to: transmit one
or more RF control signals to the MIMO radio unit."
Claim 11 further requires the RFEM board in the MIMO radio unit to receive and process those RF control signals through gain blocks and power amplifiers in the manner corresponding to claim 1. The Office Action relies on Gundel's Figure 1 and column 3, lines 13-44, for substantially all of these limitations. The cited excerpt, however, does not disclose the claimed UE architecture.
Claim 12 requires a particular article of manufacture: a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing processor-executable instructions. The cited portion of Gundel describes components of MMIMO radio unit 100, including beamforming circuitry 105, antenna processing circuits 107, front-end circuits 110, and antennas 111. The cited portion does not identify any of those components as a non-transitory computer-readable medium. A processing circuit is not, merely by virtue of performing processing, a non-transitory computer-readable medium. The Office Action does not identify: a memory or storage medium in the cited passage, processor- executable instructions stored on that medium, a processor that executes the stored instructions, or the claimed operations caused by execution of those instructions.
The examiner’s response: Gundel discloses one or more primary processors communicatively coupled to one or more processors of a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radio unit through a network (MMIMO contains various processors), the one or more primary processors coupled with a memory, wherein said memory stores instructions which when executed by the one or more primary processors cause the UE (processing circuit inherently contain memory for storing and processing instructions and data) to perform claimed steps.
Applicant’s arguments: Neither Gundel nor Su suggests that Su's receive-side protection switch should be converted into a per-pair switch that combines transmit and receive chains. Neither reference suggests providing a circulator and cavity filter between each such switch and an antenna port.
Only after reviewing claim 9 could one select the separate components from Gundel and Su and rearrange them into the claimed configuration. The references themselves do not supply the required structural relationship or a reason for constructing it.
For at least these reasons, Su does not cure the deficiencies of Gundel and Jann and does not disclose or suggest the additional subject matter of claim 9. Withdrawal of the rejection of claim 9 is respectfully requested.
The examiner’s response: In response to applicant's argument that “The cited references themselves do not provide that relationship. The rejection, therefore, relies on the present application as a roadmap for combining distinct signals and functions”, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Su discloses a TDD commination system utilize TDD switch to combine TX-RX path. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the teachings taught by Su to customize the system for different known signal types.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gundel et al. (US 11251822 B1) (Gundel herein after) in view of Jann et al. (US 2021/0391853 A1) (Jann herein after).
Re Claim 1, Gundel discloses a Radio Frequency (RF) Front End Module (RFEM) board (front-end circuit, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44) comprising:
a plurality of transmit chains for signal transmission (transmitter-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44); and
a plurality of receive chains for signal reception (receiver-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44), one or more gain blocks (attenuator 255, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) and power amplifiers (amplifier 254, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) to amplify the received RF signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain (RX path 291, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36).
Gundel teaches the claimed invention except wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
However, Jann discloses a beamforming communication system comprising: a shared digital front end (DFE); a plurality of transceiver chains, each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains being coupled to the shared DFE; processor circuitry; and a memory configured to store executable instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, causes each transceiver chain from the plurality or transceiver chains to: transmit, via a transmit path, a transmit signal via an antenna in accordance with a digital pre-distortion (DPD) coefficients of the transmit signal; measure, via a receive path, feedback data indicative of an input power of the transmit signal coupled to the antenna via the transmit path circuitry; control whether, for each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains, (i) the shared DFE, or (ii) a transceiver portion DFE of a respective one of the plurality of transceiver chains, calculates the DPD coefficients based upon the measured feedback data ([0628]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify method and system of Gundel, by making use of the technique taught by Jann, in order to improve the signal quality.
Both references are within the same field of telecommunication, and in particular of MIMO beamforming, the modification does not change a fundamental operating principle of Gundel, nor does Gundel teach away from the modification (Gundel merely discloses a preferred embodiment). The combination has a reasonable expectation of success in that the modifications can be made using conventional and well known engineering and/or programming techniques, the control signal taught by Jann is not altered and continues to perform the same function as separately, and the resultant combination produces the highly predictable result of wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
Re Claim 2, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein the RFEM board is operatively coupled with an antenna filter unit (AFU) to facilitate beam forming to multiple users (filter 210, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36).
Re Claim 3, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein the RFEM board comprises a plurality of observation chains configured as Digital Predistortion (DPD) feedback paths (digital pre-distortion (“DPD”) calibration feedback path 231) from one or more Power Amplifiers (PAS) (attenuator 230) of the RFEM board to one or more Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) of a high speed transceiver board (HSTB) (RFSOC of the set 260) for linearization (digital pre-distortion (“DPD”) calibration feedback path 231 that connects directional coupler 225 on the TX path to switch 253 on the RX path, via attenuator 230 to adjust to receiver input level, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36).
Re Claim 4, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 3, Gundel discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of observation chains carry a directional coupler, a digital step attenuator (DSA), and a matching network (directional coupler 225, attenuator 230 to adjust to receiver input level, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36, balun 257, column 4 lines 53-64).
Re Claim 5, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein the RFEM board comprises 32 transmit chains and 32 receive chains (various examples include antenna array systems, these changes affect, for example, 32, 64, or even more signal paths, column 7 lines 47-62).
Re Claim 6, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of transmit chains (TX 290, Figure 3B, column 5 lines 38-51) carry matching balun (balun 201, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36), pre-driver amplification stage (pre-driver 205, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36), and final RF power amplification stage (power amplifier 221, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) as part of a final stage of power amplification (PA) (TX pathway 290 begins with balun 201. A balun is a device that joins a balanced line (e.g., one that has two conductors, with equal currents in opposite directions, such as a twisted pair cable) to an unbalanced line (e.g., one that has just one conductor and a ground, such as a coaxial cable). Thus, a balun is a type of transformer, and it is used to convert an unbalanced signal to a balanced one, or vice versa. As shown, balun 201 provides a modulated signal 206 at a frequency of f.sub.TX1, to pre-driver 205. From pre-driver 205 the modulated signal 206 is provided, in sequence, to attenuator 203, alias filter 210, driver 220, power amplifier 221, and directional coupler 225, column 5 lines 52-64).
Re Claim 7, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein at least one of the plurality of receive chains carry low noise amplifier (LNA) (amplifier 254, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36), band pass SAW filter (SAW filter 250, column 8 lines 4-19) and a matching network (balun 257, column 4 lines 53-64) (RX path 291, column 6 lines 19-36).
Re Claim 8, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses wherein the RFEM board comprises a plurality of layers having a receiver section to receive RF signals from a user equipment (UE) (receiver-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44) and decode the received RF signals in the receiver section using receivers that form part of the plurality of receive chains, based on which the decoded RF signals are converted into digital signals and transmitted to upper layers having RF connectors (BBU, column 3 line 52 – column 4 line 15).
Re Claim 10, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 3, except wherein the RFEM board is blind mated with the HSTB to remove complexity of cable routing and avoid RF signal oscillations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize blind mate connection to connect circuit board since it was known in the art that blind mated connection are use to interconnect circuit board without cable.
Re Claim 11, Gundel discloses a user equipment (UE) communicatively coupled with a Radio Frequency (RF) Front End Module (RFEM) board (front-end circuit, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44), said UE comprising:
one or more primary processors communicatively coupled to one or more processors of a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radio unit through a network (MMIMO, column 3 lines 14-43), the one or more primary processors coupled with a memory, wherein said memory stores instructions which when executed by the one or more primary processors cause the UE (processing circuit, column 3 lines 14-43) to:
transmit one or more RF control signals to the MIMO radio unit (MMIMO, column 3 lines 14-43), the one or more primary processors coupled with a memory, wherein said memory stores instructions which when executed by the one or more primary processors cause the UE (processing circuit, column 3 lines 14-43), wherein the RFEM board in the MIMO radio unit is configured with:
a plurality of transmit chains for signal transmission (transmitter-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44); and
a plurality of receive chains for signal reception (receiver-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44), one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain one or more gain blocks (attenuator 255, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) and power amplifiers (amplifier 254, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) to amplify the received RF signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain (RX path 291, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36).
Gundel teaches the claimed invention except wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
However, Jann discloses a beamforming communication system comprising: a shared digital front end (DFE); a plurality of transceiver chains, each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains being coupled to the shared DFE; processor circuitry; and a memory configured to store executable instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, causes each transceiver chain from the plurality or transceiver chains to: transmit, via a transmit path, a transmit signal via an antenna in accordance with a digital pre-distortion (DPD) coefficients of the transmit signal; measure, via a receive path, feedback data indicative of an input power of the transmit signal coupled to the antenna via the transmit path circuitry; control whether, for each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains, (i) the shared DFE, or (ii) a transceiver portion DFE of a respective one of the plurality of transceiver chains, calculates the DPD coefficients based upon the measured feedback data ([0628]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify method and system of Gundel, by making use of the technique taught by Jann, in order to improve the signal quality.
Both references are within the same field of telecommunication, and in particular of MIMO beamforming, the modification does not change a fundamental operating principle of Gundel, nor does Gundel teach away from the modification (Gundel merely discloses a preferred embodiment). The combination has a reasonable expectation of success in that the modifications can be made using conventional and well known engineering and/or programming techniques, the control signal taught by Jann is not altered and continues to perform the same function as separately, and the resultant combination produces the highly predictable result of wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
Re Claim 12, Gundel discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising processor-executable instructions that cause a processor (processing circuit, column 3 lines 14-43) to:
transmit one or more radio frequency (RF) control signals to a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radio unit (MMIMO, column 3 lines 14-43), wherein a Radio Frequency (RF) Front End Module (RFEM) board in the MIMO radio unit (front-end circuit, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44) is configured with:
a plurality of transmit chains for signal transmission (transmitter-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44); and
a plurality of receive chains for signal reception (receiver-path, Figure 1, column 3 lines 13-44), one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain one or more gain blocks (attenuator 255, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) and power amplifiers (amplifier 254, Figure 3B, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36) to amplify the received RF signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain (RX path 291, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36).
Gundel teaches the claimed invention except wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
However, Jann discloses a beamforming communication system comprising: a shared digital front end (DFE); a plurality of transceiver chains, each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains being coupled to the shared DFE; processor circuitry; and a memory configured to store executable instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, causes each transceiver chain from the plurality or transceiver chains to: transmit, via a transmit path, a transmit signal via an antenna in accordance with a digital pre-distortion (DPD) coefficients of the transmit signal; measure, via a receive path, feedback data indicative of an input power of the transmit signal coupled to the antenna via the transmit path circuitry; control whether, for each transceiver chain from among the plurality of transceiver chains, (i) the shared DFE, or (ii) a transceiver portion DFE of a respective one of the plurality of transceiver chains, calculates the DPD coefficients based upon the measured feedback data ([0628]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify method and system of Gundel, by making use of the technique taught by Jann, in order to improve the signal quality.
Both references are within the same field of telecommunication, and in particular of MIMO beamforming, the modification does not change a fundamental operating principle of Gundel, nor does Gundel teach away from the modification (Gundel merely discloses a preferred embodiment). The combination has a reasonable expectation of success in that the modifications can be made using conventional and well known engineering and/or programming techniques, the control signal taught by Jann is not altered and continues to perform the same function as separately, and the resultant combination produces the highly predictable result of wherein the RFEM board receives RF control signals, and processes said received RF control signals through one or more gain blocks and power amplifiers to amplify the received RF control signals across one or more of the plurality of transmit and receive chains to generate power from each chain.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gundel et al. (US 11251822 B1) (Gundel herein after) and Jann et al. (US 2021/0391853 A1) (Jann herein after), futher in view of Su et al. (US 2017/0126270 A1) (Su herein after).
Re Claim 9, the combined teachings disclose the RFEM board as claimed in claim 1, Gundel discloses TDD system comprising circulator, cavity filter and antenna (column 2 line 64 – column 3 line 13, column 5 line 38 – column 6 line 36, column 3 lines 13-43) except wherein the RFEM board comprises an RF Time Division Duplex (TDD) switch that combines each transmit-receive pair, and wherein a circulator and one or more cavity filter(s) are configured between each RF TDD switch and an antenna port.
However, Su discloses a TDD radio communication system wherein radio network entity comprises an antenna 28, also known as an aerial, or a transducer designed to transmit or receive electromagnetic (e.g. radio) waves, transducing from electrical signals to electromagnetic waves, or vice versa. The radio network entity further comprises a circulator 26, which plays a role to separate a transmitting path and a receiving path, a TDD switch 25, which is configured to route transmitting leakage signals to 50 ohm resistor 29 and then to the ground in transmitting slots and connect to a receiver (RX) 22 in receiving slots, a power amplifier (PA) 23, which is configured to perform power amplifying for signals to be transmitted through the antenna 28, a low noise amplifier (LNA) 24, which is configured to perform power amplifying for signals received through the antenna 28, particularly to boost the desired signal power while adding as little noise and distortion as possible, a transmitter (TX) 21, which is configured to configure the signal for proper transmission according to radio communication protocols in the TDD radio communication system 100, and the RX 22 for proper receiving according to radio communication protocols in the TDD radio communication system 100 ([0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize the teachings taught by Su with the teachings of the combined references to further improve the signal quality and to achieve the same expected result of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
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 KENNETH T LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1862. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM.
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, Hannah S. Wang can be reached at (571) 272-9018. 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.
/KENNETH T LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights