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 .
Priority
This application is a continuation of US Application No. 15/248,634, filed on 08/26/2016, which is a continuation of US Application No. 15/205,313, filed on 07/08/2016, which is a continuation of US Application No. 15/190,450, filed on 06/23/2016, which is a continuation of US Application No. 15/175,314, filed on 06/07/2016, which is a continuation of US Application No. 15/131,460, filed on 04/18/2016, which is a continuation of US Application No. 14/736,925, filed on 06/11/2015, which is a continuation of US Application No. 14/685,720, filed on 04/14/2015.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, “the call site” should be corrected to “the cell site” in order to avoid a lack of antecedent basis rejection. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 9,596,617 B2 in view of Hillegas, JR. et al. (US Publication Number 2016/0269917 A1, hereinafter “Hillegas”).
Instant Application
1. A method for providing cell site audits comprising steps of: causing an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to fly near cell site components; collecting data associated with the cell site components, the surrounding airspace, and environment using the UAV, wherein the data is not collected by a technician during a tower climb; and processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising steps of: hovering the UAV at the cell site to provide real-time video to one or more of a mobile device and a display at another location. (claim 8 of ‘617)
Patent No. 9,596,617 B2
A method performed at a cell site with an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) communicatively coupled to a controller to perform a cell site audit, without requiring a tower climb at the cell site, the method comprising: causing the UAV to fly substantially vertically up to cell site components using the controller, wherein flight of the UAV is constrained in a three-dimensional rectangle at the cell site, wherein the three-dimensional rectangle is defined about a cell tower, and wherein the UAV is flown by a single operator without a license based on the three-dimensional rectangle constrained flight; collecting data associated with the cell site components and the surrounding airspace and environment using the UAV; transmitting and/or storing the collected data; and processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing comprises determining a down tilt angle of one or more antennas of the cell site components based on measuring three points comprising two defined by each antenna and one by an associated support bar using the UAV, plumb of the cell tower and/or the one or more antennas, azimuth of the one or more antennas using a location determining device of the UAV, dimensions of the cell site components, equipment type and serial number of the cell site components, connections between the cell site components, a status of a lighting rod and warning light on the cell tower, and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) coordinates, for the cell site audit.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: hovering the UAV at the cell site to provide real-time video footage back to a mobile device or another location.
Patent No. 9,596,617 B2 disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components.
However, Hillegas disclosed processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit (para. [0094], note that the UAV1 will collect audit data going vertically and in incremental circles 12a and 12b, around the antenna 11), wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components (para. [0063], note that e report generation engine 3k generates reports that provide the environmental conditions of a particular location with the particular RF readings. The report generation engine 3k uses data provided by the RF monitor 3a (a sensor), the altimeter 3g, the RFID sensor 3h, the thermometer 3c, the humidity sensor 3c, and the compass 3i to generate reports that are transmitted to a central location using a transmission device. Also see para. [0100]).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Patent No. 9,596,617 B2 with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connolly (US Publication Number 2012/0262708 A1, IDS) in view of Hillegas, JR. et al. (US Publication Number 2016/0269917 A1, hereinafter “Hillegas”).
(1) regarding claim 1:
As shown in fig. 1, Connolly disclosed a method for providing cell site audits comprising steps of (para. [0006], note that there is provided an unmanned aerial vehicle comprising: inspection means capable of inspecting defects on objects i.e. towers): causing an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to fly near cell site components (para. [0006], note that there is provided an unmanned aerial vehicle comprising: inspection means capable of inspecting defects on objects i.e. towers); collecting data associated with the cell site components, the surrounding airspace, and environment using the UAV, wherein the data is not collected by a technician during a tower climb (para. [0016], note that the unmanned aerial vehicle may be remotely controlled by a user or autonomously flown from the ground. Also see para. [0017], note that the inspection means may use visible detection means to allow visual detection or alternatively may use non-visible wavelengths from infra-red to ultraviolet to detect the defects).
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components.
However, Hillegas disclosed processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit (para. [0094], note that the UAV1 will collect this data going vertically and in incremental circles 12a and 12b, around the antenna 11), wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components (para. [0063], note that e report generation engine 3k generates reports that provide the environmental conditions of a particular location with the particular RF readings. The report generation engine 3k uses data provided by the RF monitor 3a (a sensor), the altimeter 3g, the RFID sensor 3h, the thermometer 3c, the humidity sensor 3c, and the compass 3i to generate reports that are transmitted to a central location using a transmission device. Also see para. [0100]).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach processing the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit, wherein the processing includes determining physical dimensions and locations of the cell site components. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
(2) regarding claim 11:
As shown in fig. 1, Connolly disclosed an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) configured to perform cell site audits (para. [0006], note that there is provided an unmanned aerial vehicle comprising: inspection means capable of inspecting defects on objects i.e. towers), the UAV comprising:
wireless interfaces adapted to allow wireless control of the UAV (flg. 2. A wireless transmitter is disclosed. para. [0038], note that when measurements have been taken by the camera and distance measuring device 102 the information is then wireless downloaded to a base station 116);
a processor coupled to the wireless interfaces (see fig. 2, a wireless transmitter which is in connection with the camera and image processor, is disclosed); and that when executed, cause the processor to:
process commands to cause the UAV to fly near cell site components (para. [0011], note that an unmanned aerial vehicle capable of inspecting defects located in difficult to access positions such as on oil platforms & refineries (e.g. flare tips), wind turbine blades, power lines, cooling towers and chimney stacks etc. The unmanned aerial vehicle may be any vehicle capable of flying which may comprise a series of rotors, see para. [0016]);
collect data associated with the cell site components, the surrounding airspace, and environment using the UAV, wherein the data is not collected by a technician during a tower climb (para. [0016], note that the unmanned aerial vehicle may be remotely controlled by a user or autonomously flown from the ground. Also see para. [0017], note that the inspection means may use visible detection means to allow visual detection or alternatively may use non-visible wavelengths from infra-red to ultraviolet to detect the defects).
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching memory storing instructions; and process the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit.
However, Hillegas disclosed memory storing instructions (para. [0025], note that devices with storage are disclosed); and process the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit (para. [0094], note that the UAV1 will collect this data going vertically and in incremental circles 12a and 12b, around the antenna 11).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach memory storing instructions; and process the collected data to obtain information for the cell site audit. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 11.
(3) regarding claim 12:
Connolly further disclosed the UAV of claim 11, wherein the collected data includes captured photo and video of the cell site and components of the cell site for processing (para. [0021], note that the unmanned aerial vehicle may use a combination of stills and/or video footage captured by camera equipment to evaluate and/or monitor defects).
(4) regarding claim 13:
Connolly further disclosed the UAV of claim 12, wherein the captured photo and video include a combination of photos and videos captured by the UAV and a mobile device (para. [0026], note that the base station may also comprise a display screen capable of displaying images being taken by the unmanned aerial vehicle. The images may be used to direct the location of the camera with all images being recorded for later analysis).
(5) regarding claim 14:
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide temporary wireless service via the UAV at the cell site.
However, Hillegas disclosed wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide temporary wireless service via the UAV at the cell site (para. [0063], note that the transmission device transmits reports using one or more wireless transmission protocols, such as WiFi, Bluetooth, radio communication, and the like. An example of a protocol that can be used is XBee wireless communication protocol (IEEE 802.15.4) which uses low power radio frequency at 2.4 GH.).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide temporary wireless service via the UAV at the cell site. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 14.
(6) regarding claim 15:
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide permanent wireless service via the UAV at the cell site.
However, Hillegas disclosed wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide permanent wireless service via the UAV at the cell site (para. [0092], note that a radio propagation model is a key algorithm used in wireless network design and optimization Propagation models can be applied for a wide variety of scenario, in-buildings or outdoors, from macro to pico cells, and from high to low frequencies and is aimed to providing the most comprehensive, reliable and efficient wireless coverage and capacity analysis within a given area).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the UAV further comprises wireless antennas to provide wireless service, and the instructions further cause the processor to: provide permanent wireless service via the UAV at the cell site. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15.
(7) regarding claim 16:
Connolly further disclosed the UAV of claim 11, wherein the collected data is used for any of verifying proper installation of cell site components, scheduling maintenance, and confirming operation of the cell site components (para. [0015], note that unmanned aerial vehicle allows inspection to be carried out when the flare is still live and online therefore allowing the plant operator to schedule what maintenance is required and any parts needed before a planned shutdown occurs. Also see para. [0018]).
(8) regarding claim 17:
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to perform one or more aspects of the cell site audit in coordination with one or more other aspects of the cell site audit being performed without the UAV.
However, Hillegas disclosed wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to perform one or more aspects of the cell site audit in coordination with one or more other aspects of the cell site audit being performed without the UAV (para. [0058], note that the on board camera control software is responsible for processing video information and providing this processed video information as an input to the on board RE transceiver. The transmitted video information is received at the ground station where it serves as input to the ground video display software. The GCS video display software displays the video on the GCS graphical user interface (GUI) and archives the video in a database for future analysis.).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to perform one or more aspects of the cell site audit in coordination with one or more other aspects of the cell site audit being performed without the UAV. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 17.
(9) regarding claim 18:
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the collecting data, and the processing comprises determining a down tilt angle of one or more antennas of the cell site components, plumb of the tower or the one or more antennas, azimuth of the one or more antennas, and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) coordinates, for the cell site audit.
However, Hillegas disclosed wherein the collecting data, and the processing comprises determining a down tilt angle of one or more antennas of the cell site components, plumb of the tower or the one or more antennas, azimuth of the one or more antennas, and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) coordinates, for the cell site audit (para. [0084], note that New Site Integration and Change Parameters of existing sites: integration of new sites and changing the parameters of existing sites, such as antenna azimuth, downtilt and tower levels for example [0085] Each time a new site is introduced into a wireless network various measurements will need to be performed to ensure the site is operating properly. Also see para. [0100], note that a phone mounted GPS is preferable. Second, the height of the antenna centerline (16 in FIG. 4) should be determined and recorded. Sensors mounted on the UAV 1 will be used to determine antenna height).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the collecting data, and the processing comprises determining a down tilt angle of one or more antennas of the cell site components, plumb of the tower or the one or more antennas, azimuth of the one or more antennas, and Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) coordinates, for the cell site audit. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 18.
(10) regarding claim 19:
Connolly disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to manipulate one or more of the call site components.
However, Hillegas disclosed wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to manipulate one or more of the call site components (para. [0056], note that the UAV 1 is shown having rotors 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d. The UAV carries an interchangeable payload package 3, which comprises various components. The package 3 may be any combination of an RF monitor 3a, typically a wide band receiver that scans the environment and records the frequencies present, an IR detector 3b, a temperature/humidity sensor 3c, a TEMS module 3d and an interference monitor 3e).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to manipulate one or more of the call site components. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to monitor, survey and audit cell towers and antennas emitting radiation using UAV (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Connolly with Hillegas to obtain the invention as specified in claim 19.
(11) regarding claim 20:
Connolly further disclosed the UAV of claim 11, wherein the instructions further cause the processor to: cause the UAV to hover at the cell site to provide real-time video to one or more of a mobile device and a display at another location (para. [0024], note that the unmanned aerial vehicle comprises detection and/or comparison means capable of comparing the size and/or category of the defects in real time or post-processing with previous size and/or category measurements taken of the defects).
The proposed rejection of claims 12-20 renders obvious the steps of the method of claims 2-10 because these steps occur in the operation of the proposed rejection as discussed above. Thus, the arguments similar to that presented above for claims 12-20 are equally applicable to claims 2-10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sharawi (US Publication Number 2016/0088498 A1) disclosed the unmanned aerial vehicle for antenna radiation characterization is an unmanned aerial vehicle having a propulsion system and a transceiver. Control signals are transmitted from a base station to position the unmanned aerial vehicle adjacent an antenna of interest. The unmanned aerial vehicle for antenna radiation characterization further includes a signal strength antenna for receiving an antenna signal generated by the antenna of interest for calculating or determining the received signal strength of the antenna signal. A received signal strength signal is then transmitted back to the base station, in real time.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Hilina K Demeter whose telephone number is (571) 270-1676.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, King Y. Poon could be reached at (571) 270- 0728. 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 PAIR system, see http://pari-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.
/HILINA K DEMETER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights