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 § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shanmugaraju (US 20220052737 A1).
For claim 1. Shanmugaraju discloses (Abstract, figure 1) A method performed by a base station comprising an antenna array having a N number of antenna branches for optimizing signal transmission powers to a plurality of wireless communication devices (UEs 112), the method comprising: identifying at least a first served wireless communication device and a second served wireless communication device among the plurality of wireless communication devices ([0095], [0097], [0098]); transmitting a first signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a first initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); transmitting a second signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a second initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); receiving a first measurement of the first signal from the first served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); receiving a second measurement of the second signal from the second served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); and performing at least one calibration procedure (i) based on the first measurement to provide a first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array and (ii) based on the second measurement to provide a second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0105]-[0107]).
For claim 2. The method of claim 1, Shanmugaraju discloses further comprising: transmitting a third signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array; and transmitting a fourth signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0108]).
For claim 3. The method of claim 1, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein the first measurement is comprised in a Channel Quality Indicator, CQI, received from the first served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]).
For claim 4. The method of claim 1, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein any of the first measurement and the second measurement comprises a Signal to Interference-plus-Noise Ratio, SINR ([0099]-[0104]).
For claim 5. The method of claim 1, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein each of the first initial set of phase values or the second initial set of phase values is applied to a respective set of one or more antenna branches ([0038], [0039]).
For claim 6. The method of claim 5, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein each respective set of one or more antenna branches is a single antenna branch ([0038], [0039]).
For claim 20. Shanmugaraju discloses A base station (Abstract, figure 1) comprising an antenna array having a N number of antenna branches for optimizing signal transmission powers to a plurality of wireless communication devices, the base station being configured to: identify at least a first served wireless communication device and a second served wireless communication device among the plurality of wireless communication devices ([0095], [0097], [0098]); transmit a first signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a first initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); transmit a second signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a second initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); receive a first measurement of the first signal from the first served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); receive a second measurement of the second signal from the second served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); and perform at least one calibration procedure (i) based on the first measurement to provide a first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array and (ii) based on the second measurement to provide a second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0105]-[0107]).
For claim 21. The base station of claim 20, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein the base station is further configured to: transmit a third signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array; and transmit a fourth signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0108]).
For claim 22. Shanmugaraju discloses A base station (Abstract, figure 1) comprising an antenna array having a N number of antenna branches for optimizing signal transmission powers to a plurality of wireless communication devices and processing circuitry configured to cause the base station to: identify at least a first served wireless communication device and a second served wireless communication device among the plurality of wireless communication devices ([0095], [0097], [0098]); transmit a first signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a first initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); transmit a second signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with a second initial set of phase values applied to the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0038], [0039], [0099]-[0104]); receive a first measurement of the first signal from the first served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); receive a second measurement of the second signal from the second served wireless communication device ([0099]-[0104]); and perform at least one calibration procedure (i) based on the first measurement to provide a first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array and (ii) based on the second measurement to provide a second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0105]-[0107]).
For claim 23. The base station of claim 22, Shanmugaraju discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: transmit a third signal to the first served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the first calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array; and transmit a fourth signal to the second served wireless communication device via the antenna array with the second calibrated set of phase values for the antenna branches in the antenna array ([0108]).
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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shanmugaraju (US 20220052737 A1) in view of Rexberg (US 20140016682 A1).
For claim 7. The method of claim 5, Shanmugaraju fails to mention wherein each respective set of one or more antenna branches comprises two or more antenna branches.
This teaching is disclosed by Rexberg (figure 3B, [0036], [0041]: each antenna element may in itself comprise one antenna or a plurality of statically configured (but reconfigurable) antennas, [0054], [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the selection techniques taught by Rexberg into the art of Shanmugaraju as to improve antenna gain or as an alternative embodiment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, because none of the references, either alone or in combination, discloses or renders obvious the claims 8-19.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300, submitted online via the USPTO's Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web) (Registered eFilers only, Registered users of the USPTO's EFS-Web system may submit a response electronically through EFS-Web at https://efs.uspto.gov/TruePassSample/AuthenticateUserLocalEPF.html), or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rui Meng Hu whose telephone number is 571-270-1105, email is ruimeng.hu@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
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, Jinsong Hu can be reached on (571)272-3965. 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 the PAIR system, see http://pair-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.
/Rui Meng Hu/
R.H./rh
May 22, 2026
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights