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 § 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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 recites the limitation “…the network access device” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8, 11, 16-20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN et al (US 2024/0314576) in view of KIL et al (US 2014/0185604).
Regarding claim 1, 19 and 20, RAMACHANDRAN et al (US 2024/0314576) the method comprising:
detecting, by a processing system including at least one processor of a network access device, a connection of the network access device in a wireless communication system of a vehicle (RAMACHANDRAN: Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, ¶140, ¶146, ¶93, detecting/discover by a device of the processing system 200 (such as the network controller device 20, part of the processing system of Fig. 2) an additional network access device or an anchor device (equivalent to the network access device) is paired/connected to a wireless communication network system of a car/vehicle/truck);
interrogating, by the processing system, at least one antenna unit of the wireless communication system of the vehicle (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶152, a request/interrogatory message is sent by the device (which is part of the processing system of Fig. 2) to the additional access device/anchor device with antennas to inquire about at least one antenna set (equivalent to antenna unit));
obtaining, by the processing system from the at least one antenna unit in response to the interrogating, a set of antenna capability information (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶144, receive radio capabilities of the additional access device’s antenna unit e.g. how many antennas and which radio capabilities (e.g. LTE or 5G) is available at the antenna unit of the additional unit); and
configuring, by the processing system, the wireless communication system of the vehicle in accordance with at least a portion of the set of the antenna capability information (RAMACHANDRA: ¶140-141, ¶146, configuring the communication system in accordance with the capabilities of the additional access device and its antenna system/unit, including based on the direction).
RAMACHANDRAN remains silent regarding the connection of the network access device comprises installation.
However, KIL et al (US 2014/0185604) discloses the connection of the network access device comprises installation (KIL: ¶57, ¶43, access router being used as an access device is installed in the vehicle).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN would have been motivated to use the teachings of KIL as it provides a way to improve reliability by prioritizing previously known installed access points as its connection would remain relatively stable (¶57). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN with teachings of KIL in order to improve reliability.
Regarding claim 2, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, wherein the configuring comprises transmitting at least one instruction to configure the at least one antenna unit (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶91, ¶156, transmitting the one instruction to configure the antenna in terms of at least beamforming/direction).
Regarding claim 5, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, wherein the configuring comprises adjusting at least one configurable parameter of the network access device (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶152, the beamforming adjustment is performed, slice selection, etc parameters are adjusted).
Regarding claim 8, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, wherein the set of antenna capability information identifies supported wireless communication spectrum (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, LTE, 5G spectrum support, operating frequencies, etc).
Regarding claim 11, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, further comprising:
obtaining existing configurations of the wireless communication system from a second network access device of the vehicle, wherein the configuring of the wireless communication system of the vehicle is further based upon at least a portion of the existing configurations (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶144, ¶143, ¶152, the configuration information of the device (such as device A, a network access device), are obtained and used to configure the wireless communication system/network 200).
Regarding claim 16, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, wherein the configuring comprises selecting values for a plurality of settings of the wireless communication system (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶140, ¶131, ¶92, selection and adjustments of values of settings including PLMN selection, beamforming adjustments, and causing adaptation of other settings).
Regarding claim 17, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 16, wherein the configuring comprises obtaining recommended setting values from a cellular network, wherein the values for the plurality of settings are selected further based on the recommended setting values (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶91-93, ¶140, the settings are based on requested/received information (recommended configuration) including position and scheduling settings).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN et al (US 2024/0314576) in view of KIL et al (US 2014/0185604) as applied to claim 16 above, further in view of GURUMURTHY (US 2023/0121913)
Regarding claim 18, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 16, wherein the configuring comprises performing a machine learning process over the plurality of settings (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶159, machine learning).
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding the machine learning being reinforcement learning.
However, GURUMURTHY (US 2023/0121913) discloses the machine learning being reinforcement learning (GURUMURTHY: ¶215-216, machine learning is reinforcement learning).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of GURUMURTHY as it maps states to actions in a way that maximizes rewards (¶216). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of GURUMURTHY in order to improve goal and objective achievement of a network.
Claim(s) 3, 7, 12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL as applied to claim 2/1/11, further in view of MARGIS (US 2016/0007169).
Regarding claim 3, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 2, wherein the vehicle includes a communication bus (RAMACHANDRAN: Fig. 3, a wired communication equivalent to bus)
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding the processing system establishes communication with the at least one antenna unit via the communication bus.
However, MARGIS (US 2016/0007169) discloses regarding the processing system establishes communication with the at least one antenna unit via the communication bus (MARGIS: ¶38, Fig. 4, Fig. 7A, a wired broadband control system bus connected to the antenna system for at least control).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of MARGIS as it provides a high-speed broadband communication on the vehicle and provides ample future expansion ability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of MARGIS in order to improve expandability and high-speed communication.
Regarding claim 7, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, wherein the vehicle includes a communication bus (RAMACHANDRAN: Fig. 3, a wired communication equivalent to bus)
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding the network access device is in communication with the at least one antenna unit via at least one communication bus of the vehicle.
However, MARGIS (US 2016/0007169) discloses regarding the network access device is in communication with the at least one antenna unit via at least one communication bus of the vehicle. (MARGIS: ¶38, ¶72, Fig. 4, Fig. 7A, a wired broadband control system bus connected to the antenna system to at least one access point/device).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of MARGIS as it provides a high-speed broadband communication on the vehicle and provides ample future expansion ability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of MARGIS in order to improve expandability and high-speed communication.
Regarding claim 12, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 11, wherein the existing configurations are obtained from the second network access device of the vehicle via a communication interface (RAMACHANDRA: ¶152, the processing system of Fig. 2, obtains configuration information of at least the network device A and network device B and all the additional network devices including their antennas and other settings).
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding the communication medium being a communication bus of the vehicle.
However, MARGIS (US 2016/0007169) discloses the communication medium being a communication bus of the vehicle (MARGIS: ¶38, ¶72, Fig. 4, Fig. 7A, communication among the components is over a communication bus).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of MARGIS as it provides a high-speed broadband communication on the vehicle and provides ample future expansion ability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of MARGIS in order to improve expandability and high-speed communication.
Claim(s) 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL as applied to claim 1, further in view of RAGHAVAN et al (US 2021/0159946)
Regarding claim 4, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 2.
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, however, RAGHAVAN discloses obtaining a report from the at least one antenna unit indicating a configuration problem; and transmitting, in response to the report, at least a second instruction to reconfigure the at least one antenna unit (RAGHAVAN: ¶87, Fig. 4, beam recovery is performed by reconfiguring the beamforming, in response to a problem report from at least an antenna unit).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of RAGHAVAN as it provides beam recovery in case of change of direction of the moving station/access devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of RAGHAVAN in order to improve mobility.
Regarding claim 6, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 5 but remains silent regarding the at least one configurable parameter comprises at least one of: a number of antenna ports; an antenna port to antenna element mapping; or a precoding.
However, RAGHAVAN et al (US 2021/0234602) discloses regarding the at least one configurable parameter comprises at least one of: a number of antenna ports; an antenna port to antenna element mapping; or a precoding. (RAGHAVAN: ¶75, a precoding matrix is configured and implemented at the antenna unit).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of RAGHAVAN as it provides beam recovery in case of change of direction of the moving station/access devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of RAGHAVAN in order to improve mobility.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL as applied to claim 1, further in view of RAGHAVAN et al (US 2025/0080182), hereinafter RAGHAVAN2.
Regarding claim 9, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1.
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, however, RAGHAVAN et al (US 2025/0080182), hereinafter RAGHAVAN2, discloses the set of antenna capability information includes at least one of: antenna gain information of the at least one antenna unit; antenna directivity information of the at least one antenna unit; or antenna impedance information of the at least one antenna unit (RAGHAVAN: ¶137-138, ¶152, the antenna capability information includes directivity information and gain information).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of RAGHAVAN2 as it provides beam recovery in case of change of direction of the moving station/access devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of RAGHAVAN2 in order to improve mobility.
Regarding claim 10, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1.
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, however, RAGHAVAN et al (US 2025/0080182), hereinafter RAGHAVAN2, discloses the set of antenna capability information includes at least one of: antenna element type information of the at least one antenna unit; or antenna array layout information of the at least one antenna unit. (RAGHAVAN: ¶138, ¶141, the antenna capability information includes shape and layout of the antenna elements and their boresight).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of RAGHAVAN2 as it provides beam recovery in case of change of direction of the moving station/access devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of RAGHAVAN2 in order to improve mobility.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL, further in view of LI et al (US 2016/0173186).
Regarding claim 14, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1.
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, however, LI et al (US 2016/0173186) discloses the configuring comprises: activating a subscriber identity module of the network access device (LI: ¶53, activate a SIM profile for an access device).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of LI as it provides a multi-layer coverage when one of the provider is not available, the other provider’s coverage provides services. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of LI in order to improve coverage of the wireless service.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL as applied to claim 1, further in view of ZEIRA et al (US 2023/0401902).
Regarding claim 15, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses method of claim 1, further comprising: establishing, by the processing system via the at least one antenna unit, a communication with at least one remote system over a cellular network (RAMACHANDRAN: ¶147-148, a connection of the network system 200 with the cellular network is performed via at least the antenna of the additional/anchor access device).
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, however, ZEIRA et al (US 2023/0401902) discloses the communication being between the telematics units of the vehicle and the remote network over a cellular network (ZEIRA: ¶32-33, ¶49, the TCU is communicating with the cellular network through a modem (access device) and antenna used by the modem)
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of ZEIRA as it provides a communication with the provider or manager of the vehicle and its diagnostic systems in case of an accident or disablement of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of ZEIRA in order to improve user experience and security of the vehicle and its operator.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL as applied to claim 1, further in view of SINGH et al (US 2025/0106617).
Regarding claim 13, RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL discloses a method of claim 11.
RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL remains silent regarding, SINGH et al (US 2025/0106617) discloses a subscriber identity module of the second network access device is deactivated in response to an activation of a subscriber identity module of the network access device (SINGH: ¶104-105, ¶62, deactivate a SIM on a first access device (hotspot) when activating a SIM on the other device to keep one subscription active at any time).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL would have been motivated to use the teachings of SINGH as it may be advantageous to temporarily provision a virtual SIM profile 112 at the vehicle, such as when a user is present within the vehicle, so that the user may access functionality associated with the virtual SIM profile 112 through the vehicle (¶58). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of RAMACHANDRAN modified by KIL with teachings of SINGH in order to improve user experience and convenience.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Document U discloses communication system infrastructure based on airborne relay for high-speed trains in the further Cyber-Physical Systems. Comparisons and feasibility analysis are provided as well as discussions of key wireless technologies and obstacles in this system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461