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 § 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, 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, 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (hereinafter Jiang)(CN 113872675 A) in view of Chakraborty et al. (hereinafter Chakra)(US 2018/0070363).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang teaches a method for allocating time-frequency telecommunication resources in a wireless satellite telecommunication system, said satellite telecommunication system comprising a satellite, user terminals UE, the satellite being suitable for simultaneously rendering multiple telecommunication beams (B_1, B_2) that are each associated, at a given time, with a separate user terminal UE and for dynamically re-centering each beam on the UE associated with said beam; each telecommunication beam (B_1, B_2) being established according to time-frequency resources selectively allocated to the associated UE; said method being comprising the following steps rendered by an electronic resource allocation unit: obtaining the position of each UE (claim 1, optimal beam and time slot; satellite and all the terminals under the satellite coverage; beam center pointing according to the terminal position information; resource allocation message; obtaining latest geographic position information of the terminal);
Jiang did not teach specifically given a set of grids (G1, G2) each representing at least a portion of the Earth's surface and each comprising a plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid, the distance between any two areas of a grid being above a determined non-zero threshold associated with the grid, the time-frequency resources are allocated relative to a time T by applying at least the following rule, at least the same time-frequency resource being associated with the grid beforehand: said time-frequency resource associated with the grid may be allocated to each of 2 UEs only if the obtained positions of said 2 UEs are in separate areas from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid.
However, Chakra teaches in an analogous art given a set of grids (G1, G2) each representing at least a portion of the Earth's surface and each comprising a plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid, the distance between any two areas of a grid being above a determined non-zero threshold associated with the grid, the time-frequency resources are allocated relative to a time T by applying at least the following rule, at least the same time-frequency resource being associated with the grid beforehand: said time-frequency resource associated with the grid may be allocated to each of 2 UEs only if the obtained positions of said 2 UEs are in separate areas from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid(P[0085], locations of the UEs; first and second UE in sector 1 and region 2(grid on earth); operation resources allocated to the first UE are different from the local operation resources allocated to the second UE; P[0073], signal strength above threshold; P[0042], satellite radio) . Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the method given a set of grids (G1, G2) each representing at least a portion of the Earth's surface and each comprising a plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid, the distance between any two areas of a grid being above a determined non-zero threshold associated with the grid, the time-frequency resources are allocated relative to a time T by applying at least the following rule, at least the same time-frequency resource being associated with the grid beforehand: said time-frequency resource associated with the grid may be allocated to each of 2 UEs only if the obtained positions of said 2 UEs are in separate areas from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid in order to reduce interference.
Regarding claim 2, Chakra teaches the time-frequency resource allocation method according to claim 1, wherein if, during a first step of allocating time-frequency resources using said set of grids (G1, G2) that are each associated with a first determined threshold, it has not been possible to allocate time-frequency resources to at least one UE (20_1, 20_2) in accordance with the rule, an additional allocation step is performed using at least one set of additional grid(s) representing at least said portion of the Earth's surface and each comprising a plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the grid, the distance between any two areas of a grid being above a second determined non-zero threshold associated with the grid, which is below the first threshold(P[0079], two UEs in the coverage area may be allocated the same resources if the two UEs are distant from each other; may not cause inter UE interference to each other due to distance between the UEs).
Claims 5-7 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claims 1, 1-2 respectively.
Claim(s) 3, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (hereinafter Jiang)(CN 113872675 A) in view of Chakraborty et al. (hereinafter Chakra)(US 2018/0070363) and Buer al. (hereinafter Buer)(US 2018/0006710).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Jiang and Chakra teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the time-frequency resources are allocated, relative to a time T, by moreover applying at least the following rule: given a first grid (G1), or a second grid (G2) separate from the first grid, from the set of grids associated with a first time-frequency resource, or a second time-frequency resource separate from the first time-frequency resource: when a UE is determined as being located in both a first area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the first grid and a second area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the second grid. said electronic resource unit is determined whether the UE is closer to the center of the first area or to the center of the second area; and if the UE is determined as being closer to the center of the first area, or the second area, the first time-frequency resource, or the second time-frequency resource, is allocated thereto. However, Buer teaches in an analogous art wherein the time-frequency resources are allocated, relative to a time T, by moreover applying at least the following rule: given a first grid (G1), or a second grid (G2) separate from the first grid, from the set of grids associated with a first time-frequency resource, or a second time-frequency resource separate from the first time-frequency resource: when a UE is determined as being located in both a first area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the first grid and a second area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the second grid, said electronic resource unit is determined whether the UE is closer to the center of the first area or to the center of the second area; and if the UE is determined as being closer to the center of the first area, or the second area, the first time-frequency resource, or the second time-frequency resource, is allocated thereto(P[0054-0056]; Figs. 1 and 3B; P[0056], first position 355 may be associated with service beam coverage area 126-c and second position 360 may be associated with second service beam coverage area 126-d; upon exceeding a threshold distance from the approved position 355). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the method wherein the time-frequency resources are allocated, relative to a time T, by moreover applying at least the following rule: given a first grid (G1), or a second grid (G2) separate from the first grid, from the set of grids associated with a first time-frequency resource, or a second time-frequency resource separate from the first time-frequency resource: when a UE is determined as being located in both a first area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the first grid and a second area from said plurality of non-contiguous areas distributed in the second grid, said electronic resource unit is determined whether the UE is closer to the center of the first area or to the center of the second area; and if the UE is determined as being closer to the center of the first area, or the second area, the first time-frequency resource, or the second time-frequency resource, is allocated theretoin order to have improved efficiency.
Claim 8 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3.
Claim(s) 4, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (hereinafter Jiang)(CN 113872675 A) in view of Chakraborty et al. (hereinafter Chakra)(US 2018/0070363) and Lee et al. (hereinafter Lee)(US 2017/0366244).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Jiang and Chakra teaches all the particulars of the claim except the time-frequency resource allocation method according to claim 1, wherein the position of a UE (20_1, 20_2) is obtained by rendering the following steps: calculating values of the beamforming weights maximizing the power of predefined signals received from a UE; estimating the direction of arrival, referred to as DOA, of a signal from a UE according to said beamforming weights determined for the UE by applying a regression algorithm linking beamforming weights and DOAs; determining the position of the UE according to at least the intersection of the Earth's surface and the estimated DOA. However, Lee teaches in an analogous art wherein the position of a UE (20_1, 20_2) is obtained by rendering the following steps: calculating values of the beamforming weights maximizing the power of predefined signals received from a UE; estimating the direction of arrival, referred to as DOA, of a signal from a UE according to said beamforming weights determined for the UE by applying a regression algorithm linking beamforming weights and DOAs; determining the position of the UE according to at least the intersection of the Earth's surface and the estimated DOA(P[0110-0111], measurement results for each beam direction; select a value predicted (regression) as a more detailed measurement results; allocate a weight value differently depending on accuracy/reliability of each measurement result and combine weight values to be used for position estimation of the UE; transmit signals using a beam direction reported by the UE as having highest accuracy/reliability). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the method wherein the position of a UE (20_1, 20_2) is obtained by rendering the following steps: calculating values of the beamforming weights maximizing the power of predefined signals received from a UE; estimating the direction of arrival, referred to as DOA, of a signal from a UE according to said beamforming weights determined for the UE by applying a regression algorithm linking beamforming weights and DOAs; determining the position of the UE according to at least the intersection of the Earth's surface and the estimated DOA in order to have improved accuracy/reliability.
Claim 9 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Chakraborty does not disclose a set of grids each representing at least a portion of the Earth's surface, with each grid including a plurality of non-contiguous areas separated by a distance of a determined non-zero threshold, and with a time- frequency resource associated with the grid beforehand as recited in the claims.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant has not defined the boundary of the grid and also if the grids are non-contiguous then must define the gap between the grids. Applicant must define what is the distance between any two areas before questioning threshold.
Chakra further teaches in P[0069], the base station may consider various factors such as geography, network topology, etc., e.g., to allocate resources based on relative locations of UEs and the base station.
Also teaches in P[0080] In an aspect, the base station may associate a UE with a respective group based on a directional beam (e.g., directional beam formed by beam-forming) of the base station used for communication with the UE. For example, the base station may partition an angular area into multiple sectors, and may group UEs based on the sectors. The base station may be at the center of the angular area. In one example, the base station may partition a coverage area spanning 360 degrees into 8 sectors, each sector covering 45 degrees. If the base station determines that reception signal strength for UEs is highest in a sector corresponding to a particular directional beam of the base station, the base station may group such UEs in the same sector together in a same group. In an aspect, if the UEs are in the same group, the base station may allocate resources for the UEs such that each UE in the group is allocated different resources for a local operation.
Applicant argues that Chakraborty merely discloses a single general geographic region around a base station and each sector refers to a grid, each sector described only includes two contiguous areas (i.e., Region 1 and Region 2).
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant has not defined the boundary of the grid and also if the grids are non-contiguous then must define the gap between the grids. Chakra defined sectors that are non-contiguous(Fig. 7).
Applicant argues that the threshold (i.e., signal strength threshold [0073]) does not represent a distance between any two areas of a grid being above a determined non-zero threshold of the same grid as recited in the claims.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant must define what is the distance between any two areas before questioning threshold.
Applicant argues that the relied upon threshold (i.e., signal strength threshold [0073]) does not represent a distance between any two areas of a grid being above a determined non-zero threshold of the same grid as recited in the claims.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant has not defined “distance between any two areas” and also the “boundary of the grid” and also the “gap” if the grids are not contiguous.
Chakra teaches in P[0085] and also in Fig. 7, sectors that are non-contiguous and also distance from base stations also different for different regions and beams are also non-contiguous. Sector 1 is non-contiguous with reference to sector 4. Alos Chakra teaches distances defined from the base stations and also based on the directional beam.
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 MUTHUSWAMY GANAPATHY MANOHARAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5515. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am-3:00pm.
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, Alison T Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/MUTHUSWAMY G MANOHARAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights