DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the application filed on 12 October 2023.
Claims 1-25 are presented for examination.
Drawings
Figures 1, 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated in the instant Background section. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 11-13, 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Qayyum et al, US 2024/0129784 A1 in the instant Background section in instant application.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
As to claim 1, The instant Background section discloses, a dynamic filtering method, comprising:
receiving a spectrum scan of one or more unlicensed spectrum frequency bands from a base station (Figure 1, an eNB 100) of an unlicensed spectrum communication system (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]);
determining, using the spectrum scan, if a radio frequency front end (RFE) of the base station is overloaded by a second transmitter (a TV transmitter) transmitting using a particular frequency band (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]);
controlling a filter bank in the base station to select filtering of the particular frequency band when the base station RF front end is overloaded (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]); and
performing, by the filter bank in the base station, filtering in the particular frequency band (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]).
As to claim 2, The instant Background section discloses, wherein the unlicensed spectrum is television whitespace and the second transmitter is a television broadcast transmitter located adjacent to the base station (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]).
As to claim 3, The instant Background section discloses, wherein the unlicensed spectrum is one of CBRS and Wi-Fi (Figures 1-2, and associated paragraphs, [4]-[5]).
Claims 11-13 correspond to the system claims of the method claims 1-3; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the method claims 1-3 shown above.
Claim 19-21 correspond to the apparatus claims of the method claims 1-3; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the method claims 1-3 shown above.
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.
Claims 4-10, 14-18, 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the instant Background section, [4]-[5] as applied to claims 1, 11, 19, and further in view of Abdelmonem et al. US 2014/0274094 A1.
As to claim 4, The instant Background section does not explicitly disclose the claimed elements of “wherein determining if the RFE of the base station is overloaded further comprises determining, at a network management system connected to the base station, if the RFE of the base station is overloaded based on the spectrum scan”.
Abdelmonem discloses in Figures 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 19A-B, 20-21 and associated paragraphs that, (“wherein determining if the RFE of the base station (the Adaptive Front-End module 56 of the eNB 16 in Figure 4, 19B) is overloaded further comprises determining, at a network management system (a central system 750 in Figure 19B) connected to the base station, if the RFE of the base station is overloaded based on the spectrum scan (Figure 7, lists of channels having interferers or a list of known typically available frequency spectrum bands, as well as various other parameters, [67]). Abdelmonem suggests, “[101] The interference detection program 300 and the high strength channel detection program 350 may be implemented by using software, hardware, firmware or any combination thereof. For example, such programs may be stored on a memory of a computer that is used to control activation and deactivation of one or more notch filters. Alternatively, such programs may be implemented using a digital signal processor (DSP) which determines the presence and location of interference channels in a dynamic fashion and activates/de-activates one or more filters”; “[125] FIG. 19A depicts an illustrative embodiment of a method 700 for mitigating interference such as shown in FIG. 15. Method 700 can be performed singly or in combination by a mobile communication device, a stationary communication device, base stations, and/or a system or systems in communication with the base stations or mobile communication devices. FIG. 19B depicts an illustrative embodiment of a communication system operating according to method 700. In this illustration, a central system 750 can collect interference information from adaptive filter modules 56 across a network of base stations interconnected by a data transport system”; “[32] One or more of the embodiments can detect interference and identify location of end user devices. In this example, based on interference or a lack thereof, antenna pattern adjustments can be performed, such as tilting or moving an antenna at a base station to reduce footprint of end user devices that can use that particular base station or tilting or moving the antenna in the opposite direction to increase footprint of end user devices that can be serviced by that particular base station. In one embodiment, use panorama data can be utilized to determine how to mitigate noise and/or increase traffic load of a base station. In another embodiment, for an adjacent base station that is overloading on traffic, antenna pattern adjustment (e.g., tilting or rotating of antenna) can be utilized to force or otherwise cause traffic of an overloaded base station to move to another base station that has experienced improvement in traffic due to noise mitigation. In one or more embodiments, the antenna pattern adjustment can be performed with or without interference filtering being performed”; “[67] FIG 7, …the adaptive front-end controller 100 includes a microcontroller 120 coupled to the PCI bus 114 and an operations, alarms and metrics (OA&M) processor 122…. In operation, the microcontroller 120 may locally store lists of channels having interferers or a list of known typically available frequency spectrum bands, as well as various other parameters. Such a list may be transferred to a reporting and control facility or a base station, via the OA&M processor 122, and may be used for system diagnostic purposes”; “[132] It is further noted that the aforementioned mitigation and detection algorithms can be implemented by any communication device including cellular phones, smartphones, tablets, small base stations, macro base stations, femto cells, WIFI access points, and so on. Small base stations (commonly referred to as small cells) can represent low-powered radio access nodes that can operate in licensed and/or unlicensed spectrum that have a range of 10 meters to 1 or 2 kilometers, compared to a macrocell (or macro base station) which might have a range of a few tens of kilometers. Small base stations can be used for mobile data offloading as a more efficient use of radio spectrum”; “[136] In FIG. 20A, each of base stations 801, 805 and 810 can have a corresponding coverage area 802A, 806A and 811, respectively, for enabling or otherwise facilitating communication devices within the coverage areas to access the communication services. The coverage areas can be a function of various criteria or parameters associated with an antenna of the base station, such as a direction (e.g., rotation and/or tilting) of the antenna, power, beam steering, and so forth. The base stations 801, 805 and 810 can be coupled with various components or structure to facilitate enabling the communication services, such as a switching station 850”; “[137] In one embodiment, interferes 825A-825E can be present within the coverage areas 802A, 806A and 811. The source of the interferers can be various types, such as bi-directional amplifiers, faulty transmitters, federal and military installations, television transmissions, intermodulation from other transmitters, intermodulation from own faulty components and connectors, and so forth”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art before the effective filing date of the claimed to have modified Abdelmonem’s teachings of a central system 750 or a Base Station with the teachings of The instant Background Section’s, for the purpose of collect interference information from adaptive filter front-end modules 56 across a network of base stations interconnected by a data transport system ([125]).
As to claim 5, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, wherein determining if the RFE of the base station is overloaded further comprises determining, at the base station, if the RFE of the base station is overloaded based on the spectrum scan (Abdelmonem, Figure 7, lists of channels having interferers or a list of known typically available frequency spectrum bands, as well as various other parameters, [67]; [32], for the purpose of transferring the lists to a reporting and control facility or a Base Station, [67]).
As to claim 6, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, at the base station, the spectrum scan based on a set of baseline filter settings in the base station (Abdelmonem, Figure 7, lists of channels having interferers or a list of known typically available frequency spectrum bands, as well as various other parameters ([67]; [32]), and activates and/or deactivates one or more filters ([101]), for the purpose of transferring the lists to a reporting and control facility or a Base Station, [67], [101]).
As to claim 7, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, wherein controlling the filter bank further comprises determining, in a network management system (Abdelmonem, the control facility 750) connected to the base station, one or more filter control signals for the filter bank and wherein performing the filtering further comprises performing, based on the one or more filter control signals, filtering in the particular frequency band (Abdelmonem, [101], “The interference detection program 300 and the high strength channel detection program 350 may be implemented by using software, hardware, firmware or any combination thereof. For example, such programs may be stored on a memory of a computer that is used to control activation and deactivation of one or more notch filters. Alternatively, such programs may be implemented using a digital signal processor (DSP) which determines the presence and location of interference channels in a dynamic fashion and activates/de-activates one or more filters”, for the purpose of determining the presence and location of the interferes, [101]).
As to claim 8, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, wherein determining the one or more filter control signals for the filter bank further comprises recalculating the one or more filter control signals for the filter bank when a channel condition of the base station changes (Abdelmonem, Figures 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 19A-B, 20-21 and associated paragraphs [32], [67], [101], [125], [132], [136], [137], and Figures 10-12 and associated paragraphs, [102]-[104] for the purpose of determining the presence and location of the interferes, [101]).
As to claim 9, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, wherein determining the one or more filter control signals for the filter bank further comprises determining the one or more filter control signals for the filter bank based on a set of network configuration data (Abdelmonem, Figures 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 19A-B, 20-21 and associated paragraphs [32], [67], [101], [125], [132], [136], [137], and Figures 10-12 and associated paragraphs, [102]-[104] for the purpose of determining the presence and location of the interferes, [101]).
As to claim 10, The instant Background Section-Abdelmonem discloses, wherein the set of network configuration data includes a channel condition of the base station generated from the spectrum scan and a location of the second transmitter (Abdelmonem, Figures 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 19A-B, 20-21 and associated paragraphs [32], [67], [101], [125], [132], [136], [137], and Figures 10-12 and associated paragraphs, [102]-[104] for the purpose of determining the presence and location of the interferes, [101]).
Claims 14-18 correspond to the system claims of the method claims 6-10; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the method claims 6-10 shown above.
Claims 22-25 correspond to the apparatus claims of the method claims 6, 7, 9, 10; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale as in the method claims 6, 7, 9, 10 shown above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 11, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Devries et al. US Patent No. 8,989,690 B2.
As to claim 1, Devries discloses, a dynamic filtering method, comprising:
receiving a spectrum scan of one or more unlicensed spectrum frequency bands from a base station of an unlicensed spectrum communication system (Abstract, Figures 1-4 and associated paragraphs);
determining, using the spectrum scan, if a radio frequency front end (RFE) of the base station (RF Front End of Receiver) is overloaded by a second transmitter (an interferer) transmitting using a particular frequency band (Abstract, Figures 1-4 and associated paragraphs).
controlling a filter bank in the base station to select filtering of the particular frequency band when the base station RF front end is overloaded (Abstract, Figures 1-4 and associated paragraphs); and
performing, by the filter bank in the base station, filtering in the particular frequency band (Abstract, Figures 1-4 and associated paragraphs).
Claim 11 corresponds to the system claim of the method claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as in the method claim 1 shown above.
Claim 19 corresponds to the apparatus claim of the method claim 1; therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as in the method claim 1 shown above.
---------------------------------------
The prior art cited in this Office action are: The Background section of the instant application; Abdelmonem et al. US 2014/0274094 A1; and Devries et al. US Patent No. 8,989,690 B2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00AM -3:30PM.
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, Kevin Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
/HAI V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649