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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 2-5, 11-15 & 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species A-D & F-I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1-6-26.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species E of Claims 1, 6, 12 & 16-17 in the reply filed on 1-6-26 is acknowledged.
Priority
Applicant' s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application, 17/538,176 filed 11-30-21, now U.S. Patent No.11757524; and 16/843,657 filed 4-8-20, now U.S. Patent No.11239903, under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8-3-23. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because All Numbers in Figure 1 should be labeled with descriptive legends (e.g. aerial drone 103-Fig.1; Likewise, all other numbers should be labeled in the same manner). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 (a method claim) is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12, line 3,
“control circuitry” should be deleted &
--- , by a control circuitry, --- should be inserted after the word
“generating”;
Claim 12, line 5,
“a radio” should be deleted &
--- , by a radio, --- should be inserted after the word “transmitting”
Claim 12, line 7,
“the radio” should be deleted &
---, by the radio, --- should be inserted after the word “receiving”
Claim 12, line 9,
“the control circuitry” should be deleted &
---, by the radio, ---should be inserted after the word “beamforming”;
Claim 12, line 11,
“the radio” should be deleted &
---, by the radio, --- should be inserted after the word “amplifying”; and
Claim 12, line 13,
“the radio” should be deleted &
---, by the radio, ---should be inserted after the word “transmitting”;
Claim 16, line 3,
---a--- should be inserted after the words “control circuitry”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
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 conflicting claims 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 Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 6, 12 & 16-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 11 & 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,239,903 B2 (Perlow). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the application claim 1 merely broadens the scope of the patented claim 1 by rephrasing “an airborne transceiver Identifier (ID); antenna(s)”{the patented claim 1} to ---data; radio---{application claim 1}. Likewise, the application claim 6 merely broadens the scope of the patented claim 5.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to eliminate or/and rephrase limitations/elements to broaden the claimed language as long as the limitations or/and elements under different names would perform the same function. It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before {In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA)} and Omission of a reference’s element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one skilled in the art {Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969)}.
Regarding Claim 1.
A method to wirelessly beamform an uplink, the method comprising:
wirelessly transmitting data that indicates an antenna aperture beamwidth for an airborne wireless transmitter {Perlow: patented claim 1, 15: 40-44 wherein “the airborne transceiver wirelessly transferring an airborne transceiver Identifier (ID) to the terrestrial transceiver wherein the airborne transceiver comprises one or more antennas that have an antenna type that has an aperture beamwidth”};
wirelessly receiving an uplink beamforming instruction and an uplink power
instruction {Perlow: patented claim 1, col.15, lines 64-66 wherein “the airborne transceiver wirelessly receiving the uplink beamforming instruction and the uplink
power instruction”};
beamforming an uplink wireless signal responsive to the uplink beamforming
instruction; amplifying the beamformed uplink wireless signal responsive to the uplink
power instruction; and wirelessly transmitting the beamformed and amplified uplink
wireless signal {Perlow: patented claim 1, col.15, lines 64-col.16, line 2 wherein “responsively beamforming, amplifying, and wirelessly transmitting another uplink wireless signal responsive to the uplink beamforming instruction and the uplink
power instruction”}.
Regarding Claim 6. The method of claim 1 wherein beamforming the uplink wireless signal comprises determining a geometric orientation of the airborne wireless
transmitter relative to a terrestrial wireless receiver and beamforming the uplink wireless signal based on the geometric orientation {Perlow: patented claim 5}.
Claims 12, 16 & 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 11 & 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,239,903 B2 (Perlow) in view of Petranovich (US 2018/0145744 A1).
-Claims 12 & 16 are rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 1, except Perlow does not explicitly disclose the airborne wireless transceiver comprising a control circuitry for generating data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Petranovich (US 2018/0145744 A1) disclose the airborne wireless transceiver {Petranovich: 200-Fig.2} comprising a control circuitry {Baugh: Antenna Control Unit 270-Fig.2} for generating data {Petranovich: Control Signal on 272-Fig.2 & ¶0043, ¶0047-¶0049, ¶0052, ¶0057 wherein “the antenna control unit 270 can provide control signal on line 272 to positioner 220 to adjust the beam of the antenna 152 to various angular positions of a correction profile (discussed below). At the same time, the antenna control unit 270 obtains an indication of signal strength (or other signal metric such as signal-to-noise ratio, bit-error rate, etc.) of a signal communicated with the target satellite 110 while at the various angular positions”} and beamforming an uplink wireless signal {Petranovich: ¶0058 wherein “the antenna control unit 270 may obtain the value of signal strength (or other signal metric) of the return uplink signal 116 that was received by the target satellite 110 from the gateway terminal 130 (or other elements of the satellite communications system 100 such as a core node, NOC, etc.) via the forward downlink signal 114”}. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to Petranovich’s teaching to Perlow’s system with the motivation being to “determine the appropriate angular position based on the location of the target satellite 110, the location of the aircraft 102, and the attitude (including yaw, roll, and pitch) of the aircraft 102”{Petranovich: ¶0048}, to “determine whether or not to perform a particular (e.g., preferred or default) mispointing correction operation”{Petranovich: ¶0049}, to “determine whether or not performing the first mispointing correction operation is permitted based on the current locations of the target satellite 110 and/or the non-target satellite 120”{Petranovich: ¶0056}, and to “provide the control signal to the positioner 220 to adjust the beam of the antenna 152 to point in the selected angular position. The antenna control unit 270 can then return to normal operations, and provide further adjustments to the angular position of the beam as the aircraft 102 moves relative to the target satellite 110”{Petranovich: ¶0059}.
Likewise, the application claim 17 is rejected with the same reasons as set forth in claim 6.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baugh (US 20090322582 A1) discloses a remote for controlling devices and communicating data to and from such devices using both IR and RF signals. The remote control may transmit a first signal to one or more devices which, in turn may each transmit a reply signal to the remote. Each reply signal typically, although not necessarily, contains an identification of the transmitting device and the signal strength of the first signal, as detected at the device. The remote may employ this information to determine which device is closest and transmit commands accordingly {Figs.1-2, 4-5}.
Moffatt (US 20220109495 A1) discloses an air-to-ground communications system includes at least one base station to be positioned on the ground and including a ground-based transceiver, a phased array antenna coupled to the ground-based transceiver, and a beamforming network coupled to the ground-based transceiver. The ground-based transceiver is configured to provide data traffic and control information to an aircraft. The beamforming network is configured to simultaneously generate at least one narrow antenna beam for the data traffic and at least one wide beam for the control information {Figs.1, 5, 10-11}.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONGCHAU BA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3148. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 AM -5:30 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, RICKY NGO can be reached at 571-272-3139.
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.
/PHUONGCHAU BA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464