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.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669).
Regarding claim 1, Clark teaches in a time division duplex (TDD) communication network (Paragraph [0046]), a signal conditioning device (Paragraph [0033], signal booster 200), comprising:
a first port and a second port (Paragraph [0073]…… a first port 207 (FIG. 2) and a second port 209);
a downlink path (Fig. 2, item 220) adapted for transporting downlink signals from the first port 209 to the second port 207; an uplink path 210 adapted for transporting uplink signals from the second port 207 to the first port 209 (Paragraph [0073]……. A signal path, such as an uplink signal path 210 or a downlink signal path 220, can include a tap circuit 218, 228. The signal path is coupled between the first port and the second port 207 and the second port 209 and configured to pass a signal in a wireless communication network. The signal may be communicated from an antenna 202, 204 to the first port 207 or second port 209); and
a passive, attenuator adapted for attenuating a signal on the uplink path 210 differently than the signal on the downlink path 220 (See Fig. 2, uplink path 210 and downlink path 220 are different) (Paragraph [0073]……. the signal path can be an amplification path configured to provide a desired amplification level or attenuation level to the signal), but does not specifically teach an asymmetric attenuator.
However, in related art, Cook teaches an asymmetric attenuator (Paragraph [0062]…. the uplink signal path and the downlink signal path can each include a variable attenuator (asymmetric attenuation). The variable attenuator can increase or decrease an amount of attenuation for a specific band in the uplink signal path or the downlink signal path, respectively. The variable attenuator can be increased in order to decrease a gain for a given band in a respective signal path, or the variable attenuator can be decreased in order to increase a gain for a given band in a respective signal path). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Cook’s teaching about an asymmetric attenuator with Clark’s invention in order to increase or reduce an attenuation at one or more of the attenuators in the signal booster to increase or reduce the gain.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Clark and Cook teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Cook teaches the device of claim 1 wherein the asymmetric attenuator is configured to provide greater attenuation on the downlink path than the uplink path (Paragraph [0062]…. the uplink signal path and the downlink signal path can each include a variable attenuator (asymmetric attenuation). The variable attenuator can increase or decrease an amount of attenuation for a specific band in the uplink signal path or the downlink signal path, respectively. The variable attenuator can be increased in order to decrease a gain for a given band in a respective signal path, or the variable attenuator can be decreased in order to increase a gain for a given band in a respective signal path).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669), and further in view of Abedini et al. (US 2021/0112479).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Clark and Cook teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Cook in Paragraph [0043] teaches a strong downlink signal would result in gain control of the uplink signal path (e.g., reducing an amount of gain for the uplink signal path) for network protection. The strong downlink signal would be determined based on a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), but does not specifically teach the device of claim 1 wherein a difference between the attenuation on the uplink path and the attenuation on the downlink path is selected based on a signal-to-interference ratio.
However, in related art, Abedini teaches the device of claim 1 wherein a difference between the attenuation on the uplink path and the attenuation on the downlink path is selected based on a signal-to-interference ratio (Paragraph [0143]……. base station 805 may select a first communication path for a first communication type and a second communication path for a second communication type. The selection of the first and second communication paths may be based on the SNR values for the first hop determined at 830, SNR values for a second hop determined at 830, an end-to-end SNR determined at 830, a ratio of one or more of the hop SNRs to the end-to-end SNR determined at 830, or any combination thereof. In some cases, base station 805 may determine the communication paths based on the magnitude of the SNR for the first hop. For example, base station 805 may select a first communication path for uplink communications and a second communication path for downlink communications. The downlink communication path may have a higher SNR value for the first hop between base station 805 and repeater 806. The uplink communication path may have a higher SNR value for the first hop between UE 815 and repeater 806. Base station 805 may determine the downlink and uplink communication paths before sending or receiving a signal). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Abedini’s teaching about wherein a difference between the attenuation on the uplink path and the attenuation on the downlink path is selected based on a signal-to-interference ratio with Clark’s and Cook’s invention in order to efficiently utilize resources in a wireless communication system.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669), and further in view of Breiling et al. (US 2017/0163452).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Clark and Cook fail to teach the device of claim 1 wherein the signals on the downlink path are at the same frequency and in a different time slot than the signals on the uplink path.
However, in related art, Breiling teaches the device of claim 1 wherein the signals on the downlink path are at the same frequency and in a different time slot than the signals on the uplink path (Paragraph [0152]….. SUDACs then have single-directional relay paths implemented, e.g. one downlink relay path and one uplink relay path, which work independently of each other. [0154] Time Division Duplex (TDD) system: The uplink and downlink payload transmission takes place at the same carrier frequency but at different time slots). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Breiling’s teaching about wherein the signals on the downlink path are at the same frequency and in a different time slot than the signals on the uplink path with Clark’s and Cook’s invention in order to achieve desired performance without having any interference.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669), and further in view of Moon et al. (US 2016/0028446).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Clark and Cook fail to teach the device of claim 1 wherein the asymmetric attenuator is a passive component devoid of external power connections.
However, in related art, Moon teaches the device of claim 1 wherein the asymmetric attenuator (Fig 1, variable attenuator 250; Paragraph [0144]) is a passive component devoid of external power connections (Paragraph [0144]…... The NFC module 1000 may include a variable attenuator 250 described with reference to FIG. 1, the attenuator 250a of FIG. 3, or the attenuator 250b of FIG. 4, thereby making it possible to reduce transmission power. This means that battery life of the mobile phone 3000 becomes relatively longer. That means no external power connections since it runs by battery). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Moon’s teaching about wherein the asymmetric attenuator is a passive component devoid of external power connections with Clark’s and Cook’s invention in order to attenuate the input power by a certain amount such that, when the input power is amplified by the fixed gain of the power amplifier, a target gain for the input power of the one or more signals is achieved.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669) in view of Anderson et al. (US 2022/0166492), and further in view of McCarthy et al. (US 2007/0072569).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Clark and Cook fail to teach the device of claim 1 wherein the asymmetric attenuator further comprises: a plurality of attenuation elements connected between the first port and the second port, the attenuation elements forming a plurality of parallel connections defining the uplink path and the downlink path, respectively, between the first port and the second port.
However, in related art, Anderson teaches the device of claim 1 wherein the asymmetric attenuator further comprises: a plurality of attenuation elements (Paragraphs [0100-0101]…..first and second attenuating unit) connected between the first port (Fig. 5, first interface port 509) and the second port (Fig. 5, second interface port 511), the attenuation elements defining the uplink path and the downlink path, respectively, between the first port and the second port (Paragraphs [0100 and 0101]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Anderson’s teaching about a plurality of attenuation elements connected between the first port and the second port, the attenuation elements defining the uplink path and the downlink path, respectively, between the first port and the second port with Clark’s and Cook’s invention in order to perform data/voice communications between a base station and a terminal in a radio communication system.
The combination of Clark, Cook, and Anderson fail to teach the attenuation elements forming a plurality of parallel connections.
However, in related art, McCarthy teaches the attenuation elements forming a plurality of parallel connections (Claim 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use McCarthy’s teaching about the attenuation elements forming a plurality of parallel connections with Clark’s, Cook’s, and Anderson’s invention in order to achieve desired performance without having any interference.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669) in view of Anderson et al. (US 2022/0166492) in view of McCarthy et al. (US 2007/0072569) in view of Kenington (US 2021/0092702), and further in view of Yadlowsky (US Patent #6,215,581).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, and McCarthy fail to teach the device of claim 6 wherein the uplink path includes a serial connection of uplink attenuation elements, the uplink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator and an isolator.
However, in related art, Kenington teaches the device of claim 6 wherein the uplink path includes a serial connection of uplink attenuation elements (Paragraph [0215]….. Each digital-to-analogue converter connects to a corresponding variable gain or attenuation element for example variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d shown in FIG. 19 (serially connected)…… It is thus possible for processor/control system 1902 (or, in an alternative embodiment, transceiver circuits 1903) to control an amount of radio-frequency (RF) signal permitted to pass through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d. An amount of RF signal passing through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d can therefore change in response to each new piece of beam-steering directional information which passes into digital circuits 1904 along connection 1902a. It could typically, for example, change for each data packet to be transmitted to each UE, thereby enabling RF attenuation values imposed upon each individual data packet by variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d to be different or the same). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Kenington’s teaching about t wherein the uplink path includes a serial connection of uplink attenuation elements with Clark’s, Cook’s, Anderson’s, and McCarthy’s invention in order to realizing optimization of network performances.
The combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, McCarthy, and Kenington fail to teach the uplink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator and an isolator.
However, in related art, Yadlowsky teaches the uplink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator (Col 4, lines 47-50) and an isolator (Col 3, lines 39-40). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Yadlowsky’s teaching about the uplink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator and an isolator with Clark’s, Cook’s, Anderson’s, McCarthy’s, and Kenington’s invention in order to reduce interference and achieve high throughput.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, and McCarthy fail to teach the device of claim 6 wherein the downlink path includes a serial connection of downlink attenuation elements, the downlink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator.
However, in related art, Kenington teaches the device of claim 6 wherein the downlink path includes a serial connection of downlink attenuation elements (Paragraph [0215]….. Each digital-to-analogue converter connects to a corresponding variable gain or attenuation element for example variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d shown in FIG. 19 (serially connected)…… It is thus possible for processor/control system 1902 (or, in an alternative embodiment, transceiver circuits 1903) to control an amount of radio-frequency (RF) signal permitted to pass through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d. An amount of RF signal passing through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d can therefore change in response to each new piece of beam-steering directional information which passes into digital circuits 1904 along connection 1902a. It could typically, for example, change for each data packet to be transmitted to each UE, thereby enabling RF attenuation values imposed upon each individual data packet by variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d to be different or the same). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Kenington’s teaching about t wherein the uplink path includes a serial connection of uplink attenuation elements with Clark’s, Cook’s, Anderson’s, and McCarthy’s invention in order to realizing optimization of network performances.
The combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, McCarthy, and Kenington fail to teach the downlink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator.
However, in related art, Yadlowsky teaches the downlink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator (Col 4, lines 47-50). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Yadlowsky’s teaching about the downlink attenuation elements including a fixed attenuator with Clark’s, Cook’s, Anderson’s, McCarthy’s, and Kenington’s invention in order to reduce interference and achieve high throughput.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669) in view of Anderson et al. (US 2022/0166492) in view of McCarthy et al. (US 2007/0072569), and further in view of Zhen et al. (US 2008/0212502).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, and McCarthy teach all the claimed elements in claim 6. In addition, Anderson teaches the device of claim 6 wherein the attenuation elements further comprise: the uplink path having one or more attenuation elements aggregating to an uplink attenuation; the downlink path having one or more attenuation elements aggregating to a downlink attenuation (Paragraphs [0100 and 0101]), but does not specifically teach a pair of circulators, the pair of circulators defining the uplink path and the downlink path in parallel.
However, in related art, Zhen teaches a pair of circulators, the pair of circulators defining the uplink path and the downlink path in parallel (Paragraph [0062]…… As shown in FIG. 7, the triple band bidirectional amplification device 700 provides a device with two amplifiers, each to amplify both downlink and uplink signals in at least one frequency band, and two circulator pairs compared to the triple band bidirectional amplification device 600 shown in FIG. 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Zhen’s teaching about a pair of circulators, the pair of circulators defining the uplink path and the downlink path in parallel with Clark’s, Cook’s, Anderson’s, and McCarthy’s invention in order to discriminate between uplink and downlink signals.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Clark, Cook, Anderson, McCarthy, and Zhen teach all the claimed elements in claim 9. In addition, Cook teaches the device of claim 9 wherein the uplink path includes at least one of a fixed or variable attenuator and an isolator; and the downlink path includes a fixed or variable attenuator (Paragraph [0062]…. the uplink signal path and the downlink signal path can each include a variable attenuator (asymmetric attenuation).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Kenington (US 2021/0092702) in view of Zhen et al. (US 2008/0212502) in view of Lee et al. (US 2008/0151763) in view of LaPrade (US Patent #4,737,733), and further in view of Sevilla et al. (US 2019/0074954).
Regarding claim 11, Clark teaches a variable attenuation coaxial adaptor, comprising:
a downlink path (Fig. 2, item 220) from a first port 209 to a second port (Paragraph [0073]…… a first port 207 (FIG. 2) and a second port 209),
an uplink path (Fig. 2, item 210) from the second port 207 to the first port 209, but does not specifically teach the downlink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for downlink signals; the uplink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for uplink signals; a pair of circulators connected between the first port and the second port, the uplink path and the downlink path forming a parallel connection between the pair of circulators; the downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators; the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators, the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path.
However, in related art, Kenington teaches the downlink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for downlink signals; the uplink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for uplink signals (Paragraph [0215]….. Each digital-to-analogue converter connects to a corresponding variable gain or attenuation element for example variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d shown in FIG. 19 (serially connected)…… It is thus possible for processor/control system 1902 (or, in an alternative embodiment, transceiver circuits 1903) to control an amount of radio-frequency (RF) signal permitted to pass through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d. An amount of RF signal passing through variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d can therefore change in response to each new piece of beam-steering directional information which passes into digital circuits 1904 along connection 1902a. It could typically, for example, change for each data packet to be transmitted to each UE, thereby enabling RF attenuation values imposed upon each individual data packet by variable attenuator elements 1908a, 1908b, 1908c, 1908d to be different or the same). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Kenington’s teaching about the downlink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for downlink signals; the uplink path including a serial connection of attenuation elements for defining an aggregate attenuation for uplink signals with Clark’s invention in order to realizing optimization of network performances.
The combination of Clark and Kenington fail to teach a pair of circulators connected between the first port and the second port, the uplink path and the downlink path forming a parallel connection between the pair of circulators; the downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators; the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators, the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path.
However, in related art, Zhen teaches a pair of circulators (See Fig. 4, items 412 and 417; Fig. 5, items 512 and 517; Fig. 6, items 612 and 617; Fig 7, items 712, 717, 719, 721) connected between the first port (See Fig. 4-7, items 405-705) and the second port (See Fig. 4-7, items 430-730), the uplink path and the downlink path forming a parallel connection between the pair of circulators (Paragraph [0062]…… As shown in FIG. 7, the triple band bidirectional amplification device 700 provides a device with two amplifiers, each to amplify both downlink and uplink signals in at least one frequency band, and two circulator pairs compared to the triple band bidirectional amplification device 600 shown in FIG. 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Zhen’s teaching about a pair of circulators connected between the first port and the second port, the uplink path and the downlink path forming a parallel connection between the pair of circulators in parallel with Clark’s and Kennington’s invention in order to discriminate between uplink and downlink signals.
The combination of Clark, Kennington, and Zhen fail to teach the downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators; the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators, the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path.
However, in related art, Lee teaches the downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators (See Fig. 3, a circulator/fixed attenuator structure 331 wherein downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators; Paragraph [0049]……. a circulator/fixed attenuator structure 331, the uplink/downlink path loss compensator 330 compensates an uplink (UL), thereby applying the same attenuation to the uplink (UL) and a downlink (DL). Also see claim 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Lee’s teaching about the downlink path having attenuation elements including at least a fixed attenuator in series between the pair of circulators with Clark’s, Kennington’s, and Zhen’s invention in order to reduce interference and achieve high throughput.
The combination of Clark, Kennington, Zhen, and Lee do not specifically teach the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators, the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path.
However, in related art, LaPrade teaches the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators (Col 2, lines 2-7….. The uplink signals which have been converted to the downlink frequencies are present at terminal 11 of FIG. 1 to be amplified sufficient to be retransmitted. These RF signals are applied to PIN diode attenuator 15 which is isolated on either side by isolator circulators 17 and 19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use LaPrade’s teaching about the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators with Clark’s, Kennington’s, Zhen’s, and Lee’s invention in order to reduce interference and efficiently perform communication.
The combination of Clark, Kennington, Zhen, Lee, and LaPrade fail to teach the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path.
However, in related art, Sevilla teaches the uplink path experiencing different attenuation than the downlink path (Paragraph [0053] and claim 16). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use teaching about the uplink path having attenuation elements including at least an attenuator and an isolator in series between the pair of circulators with Clark’s, Kennington’s, Zhen’s, Lee’s, and LaPrade’s invention in order to minimize interference with other users.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark et al. (US 2016/0269132) in view of Kenington (US 2021/0092702) in view of Zhen et al. (US 2008/0212502) in view of Lee et al. (US 2008/0151763) in view of LaPrade (US Patent #4,737,733) in view of Sevilla et al. (US 2019/0074954), and further in view of Cook et al. (US 2019/0207669).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Clark, Kenington, Zhen, Lee, LaPrade, and Sevilla fail to teach the device of claim 11 wherein the downlink path undergoes greater attenuation than the uplink path.
However, in related art, Cook teaches the device of claim 11 wherein the downlink path undergoes greater attenuation than the uplink path (Paragraph [0062]…. the uplink signal path and the downlink signal path can each include a variable attenuator (asymmetric attenuation). The variable attenuator can increase or decrease an amount of attenuation for a specific band in the uplink signal path or the downlink signal path, respectively. The variable attenuator can be increased in order to decrease a gain for a given band in a respective signal path, or the variable attenuator can be decreased in order to increase a gain for a given band in a respective signal path). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use Cook’s teaching about wherein the downlink path undergoes greater attenuation than the uplink path with Clark, Kenington, Zhen, Lee, LaPrade, and Sevilla’s invention in order to increase or reduce an attenuation at one or more of the attenuators in the signal booster to increase or reduce the gain.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Touahri et al. (US 2024/0077678), Lee (US 2023/0216188), Tan et al. (US 2023/0098404), Zhan et al. (US Patent #11,595,110), Costa et al. (US 2022/0087591), Zhou et al. (US 2021/0266844), Lupper et al. (US 2021/00295564), CA (3135834), Abdel Shahid et al. (US 2020/0145995), Barnes et al. (US 2020/0112381), Patel et al. (US 2019/0327625), Ca (3040383), Ca (3058811), Ashworth et al. (US 2018/0241109), Breiling et al. (US 2017/0163452), Lange (US 2016/0352411), Hachitani et al. (US 2016/0187442), Medbo et al. (US Patent #9,301,152), Ca (2845246), Ashworth et al. (US Patent #8,803,635), Yerrabommanahalli et al. (US 2014/0051449), Yang et al. (US 2010/0278531), Smith et al. (US Patent #7,792,547), Chari et al. (US Patent #7,489,932), Oren et al. (US 2008/0175175), Sjerling (US 2008/0147370), Shirakabe et al. (US 2008/0008126), Matsumoto et al. (US 2007/0263747), McCarthy et al. (US 2007/0161359), Zhen et al. (US 2004/0192194), and Gagnon et al. (US Patent #6,359,279).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E REGO whose telephone number is (571)272-8132. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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.
/DOMINIC E REGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 Tel 571-272-8132
Prosecution Insights