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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/02/2026, has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 02/02/2026, with respect to claim(s) 1 (and its respective dependent claims) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to claims 16-20, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of said claims has been withdrawn and claims are allowed over the prior art of the record.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-10, and 12-15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reidhead (US PGPUB 2003/0149991 A1) and further in view of Smentek (US PG PUB 2006/0160506 A1).
As per claim 1, Reidhead discloses a system (Reidhead, Fig. 2:201:203) comprising:
a processor configured to identify a reference point for an upstream signal having a particular frequency band (Reidhead, paragraphs 16, 38, 42-43, and 45, discloses The upstream information may also be designated to one or more time slots of the selected upstream channel. In one embodiment, the modulator 239 generates a test tone as the upstream test signal provided to the switch router 201 for upstream calibration, where the test tone has predetermined characteristics);
a local transmitter (Reidhead, Fig. 2:221) in communication with the processor (Reidhead, Fig. 2:221:237), the local transmitter configured to be calibrated for the particular frequency band (Reidhead, paragraphs 13, 30, 42 and 51, discloses The gateway processor 237 may also initiate transmission of an upstream test signal for upstream calibration in the selected upstream channel, as further described below. In one embodiment, the upstream test signal comprises a tone with predetermined characteristics, such as predetermined frequency, amplitude, and timing information); and
a detector (Reidhead, Fig. 2:41) in communication with the local transmitter (Reidhead, Fig. 2:241:221), the configured to determine a property in view of the upstream signal, the property including a power level related to the upstream signal (Reidhead, paragraphs 10, 15, 44, 50 and 53, discloses an upstream power loss metric is determined by the switch router 201 based on the upstream test signal from the gateway 203, and the switch router 201 transmits power control information back to the gateway 203 for purposes of programming the PCV for upstream power calibration.);
wherein the processor is further configured to store information related to the property comprising the power level related to the upstream signal (Reidhead, paragraphs 44 and 50, discloses The upstream diagnostic information 333 is stored in the memory 220).
Although Reidhead discloses a detector as being explained above however, Reidhead does not explicitly disclose (the) detector being coupled to an upstream monitoring path coupled to a transmission path of the local transmitter after at least one of: a digital-to-analog converter or an amplifier of the local transmitter.
Smentek discloses (the) detector being coupled to an upstream monitoring path coupled to a transmission path of the local transmitter after at least one of: a digital-to-analog converter or an amplifier of the local transmitter (Smentek, Fig. 5:130:140, and paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reidhead teachings by implementing an amplifier to the system, as taught by Smentek.
The motivation would be to provide a method for accurately calibrating or setting the output power of transmitter in a broadband communication system for any required frequency and output level in a simple manner that requires minimal effort (paragraph 15), as taught by Smentek.
As per claim 2, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the detector includes a spectrum analyzer (Reidhead, paragraphs 12 and 16, discloses the diagnostic logic may perform a frequency transform of the upstream spectrum information to determine upstream frequency characteristics. For example, the diagnostic logic may perform a Fast-Fourier Transform (FFT) of the upstream spectrum information to determine the frequency characteristics of the upstream communication bandwidth).
As per claim 5, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter is configured to reduce a transmission power level to compensate for analog gain change using digital gain (Smentek, Fig. 5:100:120, and Fig. 6:210:230, and paragraphs 32 and 50-51).
As per claim 6, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the particular frequency band includes at least one frequency within a predetermined upstream channel set (Reidhead, paragraphs 11 and 13, discloses Each gateway transmits a predetermined upstream test signal at a predetermined power level in a selected upstream channel, and receives corresponding upstream channel power information. Each gateway calibrates transmission power of its upstream channel based on the upstream channel power information).
As per claim 7, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the
transmitter is configured to adjust a transmission power level to save power by reducing gain when an output power level is lower than a commanded power level (Smentek, paragraphs 19 and 37).
As per claim 8, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the transmission power level is adjusted in view of calibration data (Reidhead, paragraph 13).
As per claim 9, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein Reidhead in view of Smentek does not explicitly disclose when determining the property, the detector is configured to measure a narrow frequency band.
However, Smentek Background of the Invention discloses when determining the property, the detector is configured to measure a narrow frequency band (Smentek, paragraphs 4-5, discloses a common way to calibrate and set output power is via a brute force method. At factory calibration the upconverter is set to a desired frequency of operation and the gain of the upconverter is adjusted until desired output level is obtained. This gain setting is then stored in a lookup table and can be recalled at a later time. This method is acceptable for a narrow band of frequencies and power levels).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reidhead teachings by performing calibration, as taught by Smentek background of the invention.
The motivation would be to maintaining and setting the output power level at a discrete or narrow band of frequencies (Smentek, paragraph 6), as taught by Smentek.
As per claim 10, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the narrow frequency band is measured within a particular time frame (Smentek, paragraphs 4-5, calibration time).
As per claim 12, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the processor is configured to derive calibration data based on the narrow frequency band (Smentek, paragraphs 4-5, calibration based on narrowband).
As per claim 13, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the property includes at least one of: a magnitude, a power, or a frequency of the upstream signal (Reidhead, paragraph 13).
As per claim 14, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the property includes at least one of: a gain parameter or a frequency parameter set for the transmitter (Reidhead, paragraphs 15, 20 and 39, discloses gain).
As per claim 15, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 14, wherein the gain parameter includes a gain value for the digital-to-analog converter or the amplifier of the transmitter (Reidhead, paragraphs 17 and 40).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reidhead (US PGPUB 2003/0149991 A1) and further in view of Smentek (US PG PUB 2006/0160506 A1) and further in view of Johnson (US Patent 9,203,730 B1).
As per claim 3, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the Reidhead in view of Smentek does not explicitly disclose spectrum analyzer is configured to obtain information related to when the power level related to the upstream signal drops by a particular amount of decibels (dB).
Johnson discloses spectrum analyzer is configured to obtain information related to when the power level related to the upstream signal drops by a particular amount of decibels (dB) (Johnson, Fig. 3, shows spectrum analysis with respect to power level and Column 20, lines 51-65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reidhead in view of Smentek teachings by performing power measurement, as taught by Johnson.
The motivation would be to provide a calibration system with reduced complexity (Column 3, lines 3-6), as taught by Johnson.
Claim(s) 4, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reidhead (US PGPUB 2003/0149991 A1) and further in view of Smentek (US PG PUB 2006/0160506 A1) and further in view of Azenko (US PGPUB 2004/0190544 A1).
As per claim 4, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the Reidhead in view of Smentek does not explicitly disclose transmitter is configured to provide a transmission using a particular power level that is determined by a cable modem termination system (CMTS).
Azenko discloses transmitter is configured to provide a transmission using a particular power level that is determined by a cable modem termination system (CMTS) (Azenko, paragraphs 39, discloses These characteristics are shared by all users on a given channel. User unique parameters may vary from user to user even when on the same channel and same burst type and include such things as power level. The power level of each CM is controlled by the CMTS so that bursts arrive at the CMTS at a nominal power level defined by the CMTS. Each CM must generate each burst at the appropriate time so that the beginning of the burst arrives at the CMTS at the assigned first minislot boundary specified in the MAP message).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reidhead in view of Smentek teachings by controlling the power level of the transmitter, as taught by Azenko.
The motivation would be to provide an improved system which allows more efficient use of the CMTS (paragraph 16), as taught by Azenko.
Claim(s) 11, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reidhead (US PGPUB 2003/0149991 A1) and further in view of Smentek (US PGPUB 2006/0160506 A1) and further in view of Vogel (US Patent 6,944,881 B1 A1).
As per claim 11, Reidhead in view of Smentek further discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the Reidhead in view of Smentek does not explicitly disclose particular time frame includes a Broadcast Initial Maintenance Opportunity (IMOP).
Vogel discloses particular time frame includes a Broadcast Initial Maintenance Opportunity (IMOP) (Vogel, Column 3, lines 29-40, and also please see claim 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reidhead in view of Smentek teachings by implementing a specific time frame to the system, as taught by Vogel.
The motivation would be to prevent collisions when a cable modem registers with a cable modem termination system on a cable television network following failure of a primary communications channel between the cable modem and the cable modem termination system (Column 2, lines 56-60), as taught by Vogel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20, are allowed over the prior art of the record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED Z HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)270-5169. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY-FRIDAY 9-5:30 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, SAM K Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/SYED HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633