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 .
EXAMINER’S COMMENT
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 08/03/2026 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.98(a)(4) because it lacks the appropriate size fee assertion. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits.
Drawings
In view of the amendment filed on 07/24/2026, the Examiner withdraws Drawing objections of the previous Office action.
Specification
The modifications to the specification were received on 07/24/2026. These modifications are accepted by the Examiner.
In view of the amendment filed on 07/24/2026, the Examiner withdraws Specification objections of the previous Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The modifications to the claims were received on 07/24/2026. These modifications are accepted by the Examiner.
In view of the amendment filed on 07/24/2026, the Examiner withdraws claim rejections under 35 USC § 112(b) to claims 4 and 6-7 of the previous Office action.
In view of the amendment filed on 07/24/2026, the Examiner withdraws claim rejections under 35 USC § 112(d) to claim 6 of the previous Office action.
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 14-15 and 18-19 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.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites the limitation "the power storage" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites the limitation "the power storage" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites the limitation "the base station battery network" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites the limitation "the electrical power grid" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites the limitation "the electrical power grid" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claim rejections under 35 USC § 103:
Applicant's arguments filed 07/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant contends:
“However, according to paragraph [0044] of Chentnik, "The traditional electric utility grid as we know it today could dramatically change for the better with widespread usage of this design." (Emphasis added). Additionally, paragraph [0045] of Chentnik states "Solar rings deployed in numbers throughout the utility grid worldwide, combined with modern battery technologies could eventually replace legacy power plants of all types." (Emphasis added). Further, paragraph [0046] of Chentnik states "Backup power provided by these systems can help back-feed power to utility grids on an enormous scale making their potential as an energy storage and distribution network limitless." Therefore, the backfeeding in Chentnik appears to specifically require solar rings The combination does not result in "enabling grid-backfeeding using a battery at the MIMO antenna site" as recited in the pending claims. Therefore, Applicant submits that Papa and Chentnik, alone or in combination, do teach or suggest each claimed element. Further, according to paragraph [0036] of Chentnik, "Another objective of the invention is to support any new or existing wireless communications network in an environment that does not have easily accessible, cost effective or reliable grid connected utility power, and thereby creating a cellular network infrastructure without a connection to a utility grid." (Emphasis added). Consequently, Applicant submits there is no motivation to combine Chentnik with Papa as proposed because an objective of Chentnik is cellular network infrastructure with no connection to a utility grid. For the reasons above, independent Claims 1 and 8, should be allowed. As each of the dependent claims depends from an allowable base claim, each of the dependent claims is believed to be allowable for at least the same reasons. Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and allowance”
The Examiner disagrees, and asserts that, as indicated in the previous Office action “Chentnik discloses performing grid-backfeeding using a battery at the antenna site (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”).
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Chentnik discloses in paragraph [0045] “Solar rings deployed in numbers throughout the utility grid worldwide, combined with modern battery technologies could eventually replace legacy power plants of all types. This capability is only achievable with a solar ring's design capable of vast energy harvesting without wind, weight, structural and aesthetic concerns. These solar energy harvest systems that can make utility systems worldwide more efficient, more robust and more reliable. If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.
Chentnik discloses in paragraph [0046] “With enough solar energy harvest and battery storage, lifesaving power can be much more available from a free and clean source that is readily available worldwide. Backup power provided by these systems can help back-feed power to utility grids on an enormous scale making their potential as an energy storage and distribution network limitless. In the case of a post-hurricane scenario, these systems could be used to keep lifesaving power available by eliminating the linear design restraints of the traditional power grid infrastructure”.
For these reasons, and the reason of the precious Office action, the rejection of claim 1 is maintained.
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 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.
Claims 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papa (US 2019/0274105 A1) in view of Chentnik (US 2020/0343852 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Papa discloses collecting data impacting power consumption for a multiple-in, multiple-out (MIMO) antenna site (figure 1 and 4 block 401 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); generating a power management profile based on the collected data (figure 1 and 4 block 402 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); collecting current data to apply to the power management profile (figure 1 and 4 block 403 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); and applying current data collected to the power management profile and scheduling a MIMO leg's on/off schedule based on the numbers of users served and other access stations in the cell area (figure 1 and 4 block 404 paragraph [0011], [0023]-[0029] and [0034]-[0045]).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
336
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
596
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Papa doesn’t disclose enabling grid-backfeeding using a battery at the antenna site. Chentnik discloses enabling grid-backfeeding using a battery at the antenna site (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”). Papa and Chentnik are analogous art because they are from the same field of communications. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in the technique disclosed by Papa the pack feeding disclosed by Chentnik. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to use the system in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations (see Chentnik paragraphs [0045] and [0046]). See also KSR. In the KSR case, the Court stated that in certain circumstances what is obvious to try is also obvious, such as where "there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem, and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." Regarding hindsight, the Court found that "[r]igid preventive rules that deny fact finders recourse to common sense . . . are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it." The Court stated that "familiar items may have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes," analogizing an obvious invention to the fitting together of pieces to a puzzle. The Court in this regard further stated that the person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, and not "an automaton."
Regarding claim 8, Papa discloses a coordinating server coupled to a multiple-in, multiple-out (MIMO) antenna site having a battery, the coordinating server including a processor coupled to a memory and configured to (abstract figure 1 and 4 block 401 paragraph [0011]-[0017], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]) collecting data impacting power consumption for a multiple-in, multiple-out (MIMO) antenna site (figure 1 and 4 block 401 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); generating a power management profile based on the collected data (figure 1 and 4 block 402 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); collecting current data to apply to the power management profile (figure 1 and 4 block 403 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]); and applying current data collected to the power management profile and scheduling a MIMO leg's on/off schedule based on the numbers of users served and other access stations in the cell area (figure 1 and 4 block 404 paragraph [0011], [0023]-[0029] and [0034]-[0045]). Papa doesn’t disclose enabling grid-backfeeding using a battery at the antenna site. Chentnik discloses enabling grid-backfeeding using a battery at the antenna site (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”). Papa and Chentnik are analogous art because they are from the same field of communications. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in the technique disclosed by Papa the pack feeding disclosed by Chentnik. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to use the system in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations (see Chentnik paragraphs [0045] and [0046]). See also KSR above.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Papa and Chentnik disclose claims 1 and 8, Papa also discloses determining whether an update to the power management profile is needed (figure 1 and 4 block 405 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0042]).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Papa and Chentnik disclose claims 2 and 9, Papa also discloses responsive to an update to the power management profile being needed performing repeating the steps of generating a power management profile based on the collected data, collecting current data to apply to the power management profile, and applying current data collected to the power management profile and suggesting an action related to a MIMO leg (figure 4 block 405 Yes back to block 402, 403 and 404 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0045]).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Papa and Chentnik disclose claims 2 and 9, Papa also discloses responsive to an update to the power management profile not being needed performing the steps of collecting current data to apply to the power management profile, and applying current data collected to the power management profile and suggesting an action (figure 4 block 405 No back to block 403 and 404 paragraph [0011], [0023] and [0038]-[0042]).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Papa and Chentnik disclose claims 1 and 8, Papa also discloses managing power by considering factors that impact the electrical power usage, the factors including at least one of: a number of users serviced by the wireless fronthaul access point, distance from other wireless base stations, power consumption by individual components including power amplifiers, base stations, processors, and other system components, traditional weather pattern in the region, number of solar panels and power generated by solar panels, standby power supply and its current capacity and condition, or a scheduling algorithm that relaxes a need to keep the power amplifiers on continuously (abstract paragraph [0016], [0018], [0021], [0038]-[0039], [0044] and [0046], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 1, Papa also discloses generating the power management profile is based on variables including at least one of: current weather, number of users, time of the day, day of the week, effect of scheduling algorithms, or a number of solar panels needed to produce electrical energy needed based on weather pattern (abstract paragraph [0016], [0018], [0021], [0038]-[0039], [0044] and [0046], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 2, Papa also discloses determining whether an update to the power management profile is needed further comprises collected data indicating that the power management profile needs to be updated based on changes in the data that are outside of previously observed pattern, and inapplicable to generate correct predictions and instructions (abstract paragraph [0046], claims 10 and 19).
Regarding claim 13, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Chentnik also discloses the battery is configured to provide power storage for an electrical power grid as a grid-scale battery (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”).
Regarding claim 14, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses MIMO antenna site is one of a plurality of base stations forming a base station battery network, the power storage being provided collectively by the plurality of base stations (abstract paragraph [0016], [0018], [0021], [0038]-[0046], claims 7, 8, 15, 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 15, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to coordinate the power storage provided by the base station battery network (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 16, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to provide a view of battery charge levels at each of a plurality of base stations in an operator network (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 17, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses at least one of grid-tied operation, on-grid operation, utility-interactive operation, grid intertie operation, and grid back-feeding (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1). Chentnik also discloses at least one of grid-tied operation, on-grid operation, utility-interactive operation, grid intertie operation, and grid back-feeding (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”)
Regarding claim 18, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the battery is configured to be charged from the electrical power grid when the electrical power grid is available (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1 “Standby battery voltage and charge status information may be communicated and used to determine availability of power, in embodiments that utilize battery backup. The coordinating sever may further compare the tentative electrical power produced by the solar panels and the batteries based on the present and forecasted weather condition to the total power needed for the operation based on the number of users being served, power needed for fronthaul access, backhaul access, radios, antennas, power amplifiers, filters, etc., in order to adjust the amount and source of the electrical power needed for operation. Power management may be provided for base stations connected to the power grid, as well, in some embodiments, in the same manner as discussed throughout this disclosure”).
Regarding claim 19, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses powering the MIMO antenna site (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1). Chentnik also discloses when power from the electrical power grid becomes unavailable, to supply stored power for at least one of grid back-feeding (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”)
Regarding claim 20, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to prioritize between battery usage for powering the MIMO antenna site during a power outage (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1). Chentnik also discloses grid back-feeding (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”)
Regarding claim 21, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to modulate electricity use at the MIMO antenna site using one or more power management features of the MIMO antenna site (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 22, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to modulate electricity use across a plurality of base stations of a base station battery network (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 23, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the coordinating server is further configured to perform costing and pricing functions for use of an electrical power grid and of a base station battery network (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0025]-[0043], [0059] claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 24, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 14, Papa also discloses the plurality of base stations is interconnected by power cabling for power transmission such that a cellular operator network comprising the plurality of base stations operates as a power grid (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0025]-[0043], [0059] claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1).
Regarding claim 25, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the power transmitted via the power cabling is derived at least in part from a renewable power source (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1). Chentnik also discloses the power transmitted via the power cabling is derived at least in part from a renewable power source (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0045]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.”)
Regarding claim 26, Papa and Chentnik disclose claim 8, Papa also discloses the battery is configured to power a mission-critical public safety function of the MIMO antenna site during a power failure (abstract paragraph [0014]-[0017], [0018], [0021], [0035]-[0043], claims 7, 8, 15 and 17 figure 1). Chentnik also discloses the battery is configured to power a mission-critical public safety function of the antenna site during a power failure (figure 1 paragraphs [0003], and [0026]-[0046] “If deployed at a sufficient scale with optional, onboard modern battery technologies, these solar energy systems, which are capable of storing significant amounts of battery power, could back feed the Smart Grid in times of emergency, black outs, disaster, high demand situations, etc.” “Solar assisted cell poles can also use solar as a single power source in developing parts of the world or rural parts of a country. This will make life saving critical communications available anywhere in the world without the need for utility grid connections.”)
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 JUAN A TORRES whose telephone number is (571) 272-3119. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Kenneth N Vanderpuye can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/JUAN A TORRES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights