CTNF 18/728,954 CTNF 64228 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 2. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should be submitted on a separate sheet. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 06-14 AIA 3. Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art. If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives. Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps. Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts. Drawings 4. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, in claim 1; the antenna subarray, ADC’s, DAC’s and connections between each as well as the connections between the calibrations circuit and ADC’s and DAC’s. In claim 2, the transmission line. In claims 3 and 4, the connections between the calibration circuit and the one and plurality as described. In claim 14, the computer storage medium. All the features of claims 1-4 and 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 06-22 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA 6. Claims 1- 20 are ob jected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, line 5, “Digital-to-Analog, Converters DAC” should be changed to --Digital-to-Analog Converters, DA-- In claims 1-4, 7, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 20; “signalling” should be changed to signaling— In claims 2, 5 and 18; “utilising” should be changed to –utilizing— In claims 13, 14; “operating operating” should be change to –operating -- Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 7. Claims 1-20 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. 8. In claims 1, 11, 12 and 14, the term “connectable” is indefinite. The meets and bounds of the claims need to be clear. The use of “connectable” implies that it could be connected or not which makes the claims indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 9. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 14 is drawn to a computer storage medium which is not limited to only non-transitory embodiments in the specification and thus could be a signal which is not one of the statutory categories of invention. It is suggested that the applicant add ”non-statutory” after “A” on line 1 of claim 14 to overcome this rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 10. 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA 11. Claim s 1-9, 11-13, 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al US 11831364 B2 in view of Uchida JP 2010283732A (cited by applicant) . 12. Consider claims 1 and 11. Kim et al teaches (fig 15 A) an antenna circuitry for a radio node (RU), the antenna circuitry being at least one of (a) connected or connectable to, and (b) included in, an antenna arrangement comprising a plurality of antenna subarrays (reads on stacked antenna elements see abstract), the antenna circuitry being arranged (see col 16, lines 32-48) to connect (at RFIC) each of one or both of a plurality of Digital-to-Analog, Converters DACs, and Analog-to Digital Converters, ADCs, to a different one of the plurality of antenna subarrays for signal transmission (see col 16, lines 28-31), the antenna circuitry comprising a calibration network (see col 17,lines 10-21). Kim fails to teach the calibration network being configured to provide signaling from one or more of the DACs to one or more of the ADCs. However, from the same field, Uchida (figs 1 and 2) teaches such (… the CAL function of the first embodiment of the present invention includes a calibration signal transmission circuit 20 that generates a calibration (CAL) signal for transmission and reception correction, and an A / D converter 11 that performs analog / digital mutual conversion. D / A converter 12, transmission / reception control circuit 13 that performs transmission / reception control, couplers 7-1 to 7-n that perform CAL signal folding, antennas 8-1 to 8-n that perform wireless transmission / reception of normal signals …). It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to add the signaling directly to the ADC’s and DAC’s as taught by Uchida in Kim for smother beam transmission. Method claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as apparatus claim 1 since the recited elements would perform the claimed steps. 12. Regarding claim 2. Uchida et al teaches (figs 1 and 2) wherein a connection between a DAC (11) and a subarray (8-1, 8-n) is represented by a transmission line (through 13) for transmission of signaling by the subarray (8-1, 8-n) utilizing one or both of the antenna circuitry, and a connection between an ADC (12) and the subarray is represented by a reception line (through 13) for reception of signaling by the subarray utilizing the antenna circuitry. 13. Regarding claims 3 and 16. Uchida et al teaches (figs 1 and 2) the calibration network being controllable (control circuit 22) to provide signaling from one DAC (11) to a plurality of ADCs (… CAL signals that are looped back Calibration signal distributor / combiner 6 that performs distribution and combination …). 14. Regarding claims 4 and 17, Uchida et al teaches (figs 1 and 2) the calibration network being controllable (control circuit 22) to provide signaling from a plurality of DACs (111, 11n) to one ADC (… CAL signals that are looped back Calibration signal distributor / combiner 6 that performs distribution and combination …). 15. Regarding claims 5 and 18. Kim et al teaches (fig 16) the antenna circuitry being configured (col 17, lines 10-20) to perform calibration utilizing the calibration network. 16. Regarding claims 6 and 19. Kim et al teaches the antenna circuitry being configured to perform calibration based on a reference calibration (reads on captured signal in col 17, lines 56-64). 17. Regarding claims 7 and 20. Kim et al teaches the antenna circuitry configured to perform calibration based on calibration signaling transmitted utilizing the antenna circuitry (reads on captured signal in col 17, lines 31-40). 18. Regarding claims 8 and 21. Uchida et al teaches (figs 11 and 12) wherein the antenna circuitry provides Intermediate Frequency, IF, signal processing (see mixers in each path). 19. Regarding claim 9. Uchida et al teaches (fig 12) wherein one or both each DAC is associated to a different one of the plurality of subarrays (5), and each ADC is associated to a different one of the subarrays (depending on the signal). 20. Regarding claim 12. Kim et al teaches (see column 15, lines 37-38) wherein the radio node is a network node or wireless device (reads on radio module) . 07-21-aia AIA 21. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al US 11831364 B2 in view of Uchida JP 2010283732A further in view of Tang et al US 20170346575 A1 . 22. Regarding claim 10. The combination of Kim in view of Uchida fails to teach the antenna circuitry being configured to perform calibration based on a temperature or schedule. However, Tang et al, from the same field of endeavor teaches such (see 0078 where schedule reads on periodic). It would have been obvious, before the effective date, to add either temperature measurement or scheduling to the calibration as taught by Tang et al in the combination in order to routinely maintain the system . 07-21-aia AIA 23. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al US 11831364 B2 in view of Uchida JP 2010283732A further in view of Miao et al US 20180212658-A1 . 24. Regarding claim 14. The combination of Kim and Uchida fails to teach a computer storage medium storing a computer program comprising instructions causing one or both processing circuitry and antenna circuitry to one or both control and perform a method of operating a radio node. However, from the same field of endeavor Miao et al teaches such (see 1820 and 1810 in fig 18) for his calibration control system. It would have been obvious to substitute Miao et al control for that manual control taught by the combination for more reliable calibration of the antenna circuitry . 07-96 AIA 25. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sun US 20160294488 A1 teaches a radio unit comprises an antenna calibrator, a plurality of transmission signal processing sections, a plurality of power amplifiers, a plurality of bandpass filters, a plurality of couplers, a plurality of reception signal processing sections and a first combiner. The antenna calibrator is configured to generate a plurality of individually identifiable reference signals used for transmission calibration. The transmission signal processing sections are configured to modulate the signals in parallel. Harel et al US 20150124634 A1 teaches a calibration circuit and software modules configured to eliminate or reduce mismatches and phase deviations between the different transceivers, wherein the calibration circuit and software modules are incorporated in system such that the elimination or reduction of mismatches and phase deviations is non-interrupting with a continuous operation of the system at the specified communication scheme . Conclusion 26. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7499. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th from 530am to 330pm and Fri from 530am to 10am. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew D Anderson, can be reached at telephone number 5712724177. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice. /CURTIS A KUNTZ/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 2 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 3 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 4 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 5 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 6 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 7 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 8 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 9 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 10 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 11 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/728,954 Page 12 Art Unit: 2646
Prosecution Insights