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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 16 recites “One or more computer-readable media”. However, it appears that “One or more computer-readable media” could be formed without any form of hardware, i.e., software to be downloaded, and “machine-readable media” would reasonably be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as “transitory media”, i.e., signal, which is, as combined, directed to non-statutory subject matter. The specification of the instant application does not exclude “transitory machine-readable media”. Examiner recommends reciting “One or more non-transitory computer-readable media” for the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 limitation “a dynamic control unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Claims 10, 13, and 15 also recite the limitations.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuffner et al. (US 20100304680) in view of Lagrotta et al. (US 20230403073).
Regarding claim 16, Kuffner discloses [0025] If the first antenna does have the highest received signal strength, then the second antenna is selected for secondary communication on the channel under consideration (312) and [0021] the controller to determine an appropriate antenna polarization, or select an appropriate antenna or antenna power configuration from among the plurality of antennas, as well as to change to a different antenna. Kuffner teaches using a first antenna at a first elevation for standard signal transmission to a user equipment (Fig. 1, 108); using a second antenna at a higher elevation (Fig. 1, 106).
Kuffner, however, does not expressly teach a second antenna, signal transmission during atmospheric ducting events; and activating a switching protocol to transfer signal transmission responsibilities from the first antenna to the second antenna upon detecting conditions indicative of atmospheric ducting. Lagrotta teaches Fig. 6 and [0060] an exemplary system 600 for transmitting and receiving electromagnetic and/or acoustic signals within an atmospheric duct condition including an integrated navigation unit (INU) 605. … An electronically steerable array, such as a phased array, may apply phase shifted signals to teach of the array elements 620 to electronically steer the beam direction 625 to different azimuth and/or elevation angles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kuffner’s changing to a different antenna, (see Fig. 1, mobile unit with antenna 106 and 108) with Lagrotta’s Fig. 6 ([0060] an atmospheric duct condition including an integrated navigation unit (INU) 605 …may apply phase shifted signals to teach of the array elements 620 to electronically steer the beam direction 625 to different azimuth and/or elevation angles) in order to employ beam acquisition, adaptive and/or distributed beamforming techniques to address propagation impairments caused by the rapid decrease in refractive index of the lower atmosphere ([0001], Lagrotta).
Regarding claim 19, Kuffner does not teach comprising using predictive analytics to preemptively adjust the switching protocol based on forecasted weather patterns associated with atmospheric ducting. Lagrotta teaches Fig. 5, 510 and [0048] The transmitter may monitor the propagation time of the pulse between transmission and reception of the reflected pulse from the atmospheric refractive layer to determine the altitude of the atmospheric refractive layer. Alternatively, the method may estimate the altitude of the atmospheric refractive layer in response to an ambient humidity, ambient temperature and/or atmospheric pressure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine with Lagrotta in order to employ beam acquisition, adaptive and/or distributed beamforming techniques to address propagation impairments caused by the rapid decrease in refractive index of the lower atmosphere ([0001], Lagrotta).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the cited references teaches or suggests the claim 1 limitations “determining that the atmospheric conditions and downlink signal degradation are an indication of atmospheric ducting; and based on the determination of the indication of the atmospheric ducting, transmitting the downlink signal from a second antenna”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McHenry (US 20020002052) discloses [0009] these propagation conditions might change because of ducting or other temporary atmospheric conditions
Wurtenberger et al. (US 10117248) discloses Fig. 4, at step 410, a first base station, such as first base station 310 in FIG. 3, may receive an indicator of atmospheric conditions for at least a region between the first base station and a second base station and 939. At step 450, upon determining to utilize the ducting mitigation mode, instructions may be sent to the first base station to make one or more adjustments to a portion of first base station antennas.
Song (US 20230337083) discloses Fig. 6 [0102] At 610, the user device selects or reselects one of the at least two candidate cell sites having the second cell site type as a serving cell site for the user device... [0097] the user device determines the first radio link quality and the second radio link quality by monitoring a downlink quality associated with the candidate cell sites based on one or more metrics of the downlink radio link quality.
Meredith et al. (US 20130337844) discloses [0052] Hata-Okumura radio propagation model was noted above, and assumes path loss associated with urban, suburban or rural morphologies, in some embodiments, atypically low path loss parameters (e.g., parameters that occur across lakes or in conditions called atmospheric super-refraction and atmospheric refractive ducting) can be assumed.
Forenza et al. (US 20110002411) discloses [0444] A DIDO system with a DIDO configurator at the Base Station as in FIG. 19 to adaptively select the number of users, DIDO transmission schemes (i.e., antenna selection or multiplexing), modulation/coding scheme (MCS) and array configurations based on the channel quality information, to minimize SER or maximize per user or downlink spectral efficiency.
Engstrom (US 20080194265) discloses Fig. 4 and [0044] If the antenna azimuth is changed more than 5.degree. and/or a change of the antenna height has occurred.
Marupaduga (US 11540232) discloses (58) col. 14 line 8, Tropospheric ducting may be caused by certain atmospheric conditions that in turn cause an increase of signal propagation. Signal propagation causes interference when signals are transmitted between base stations 421A and 421B in a neighboring market, leading to downgrading of radio communication links. Dynamically allocating the first frequency band to the second communication protocol may reduce this effect.
JACOBSSON et al. (WO 2024208405) discloses page 13 line 35, With ducting identified, steering of the antenna may be employed to restore the received signal level.
GOLDBERG (CA 2673362) discloses [0057-0058] Causes of multipath include atmospheric ducting, ionospheric reflection and refraction, and reflection and refraction from terrestrial objects, such as mountains and buildings. [0058] The antenna array 32 comprises a plurality of antenna elements 34, with each antenna element providing at least one linear combination (mixture) of the source signals 22 from the signal sources 20. The antenna elements 34 include a first antenna element 34(1) through an Nth antenna element 34(N). [0061] The antenna array 32 may include one or more antenna elements 34. The antenna elements 34 may be configured so that the antenna array 32 forms a phased array or switched beam antenna
Upadhya et al. (US 12362818) discloses Fig. 4 (7) means for initiating measurement indicative of a quality of service (QoS) between the second antenna of each of the one or more candidate relay systems and the mobile target object when at the orientation, or within the range of orientations indicated in the control data. The apparatus may further comprise means for sending the QoS measurements for the or each candidate relay system to the network node. The apparatus may further comprise means for receiving selection of an optimal relay system from the network node and sending a further control signal to said selected optimal relay system for using said relay system to relay signals between the base station and the mobile target object.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNSOOK CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-1822. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 5712723940. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EUNSOOK CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467