CTNF 18/736,235 CTNF 101628 -DETAILED ACTION 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. Priority Applicant’s claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is acknowledged. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Such claim limitations are: means for tuning a first antenna panel to a first frequency band associated with a first radio access technology… in claim 19. means for tuning a second antenna panel to a second frequency band associated with a second radio access technology… in claim 19. means for monitoring a traffic level of communications via the first frequency band associated with the first radio access technology… in claim 19. means for selecting a third antenna panel for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level and an isolation level between the first antenna panel and the second antenna panel… in claim 19. means for monitoring the traffic level of communications via the first frequency band based at least in part on the first frequency band overlapping with, being adjacent to, being a harmonic order to, or being an intermodulation order to the second frequency band… in claim 20. Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof which for: See paragraph 0131, the device 705 may include a communications manager 720 comprising the tuning component 725 (see Fig. 7 and paragraph 0135) See paragraph 0131, the device 705 may include a communications manager 720 comprising the tuning component 725 (see Fig. 7 and paragraph 0135) See paragraph 0131, the device 705 may include a communications manager 720 comprising the traffic component 730 (see Fig. 7 and paragraph 0135) See paragraph 0131, the device 705 may include a communications manager 720 comprising the selection component 735 (see Fig. 7 and paragraph 0135) See paragraph 0131, the device 705 may include a communications manager 720. An aspect of 720 is the communications manager 820 (see Fig. 8 and paragraph 0136) comprising the traffic component 830 (see Fig. 8 and paragraph 0138) If Applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-5, 8, and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over HomChaudhuri et al. (US 20170265205 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200328785 A1) and further in view of Evans et al. (US 6774864 B2) . Consider claim 1, HomChaudhuri et al. disclose a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code (see Figure 10, the memory 1010); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to (see Figure 10, the processor 1020. “The memory 1010 may store computer-readable, computer-executable software including instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to perform various functions described herein” (see paragraph 0168)): tune a first antenna panel to a first frequency band associated with a first radio access technology (see Figure 1, “ The UE 115 may be communicating on the radio frequency spectrum band in a first RAT (e.g., a WAN RAT) using multiple antennas)” (see paragraph 0065)); tune a second antenna panel to a second frequency band associated with a second radio access technology (see Figure 1, “ The UE 115 may reconfigure one antenna to a second RAT (e.g., a WLAN RAT) and perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0065)); monitor a traffic level of communications via the first frequency band associated with the first radio access technology (see Figure 1, “The UE 115 may determine a demand requirement for the first RAT communications, e.g., whether the throughput requirement for each link is exceeded for the first RAT communications, based on the link signal strength/quality, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the first RAT communications, etc.” (see paragraph 0068)); and select an antenna for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level of active antennas ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0024)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a UE wherein a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. such that a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels as taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. However, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. fail to disclose wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels. In the same field of endeavor Evans et al. disclose a UE wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels ( “By selecting a subset of two transmit antennas and two receive antennas, it is likely that a combination of transmit and receive antennas can be chosen such that good isolation can be obtained at the receivers between the individual transmitter signals” (see Col. 4, lines 14-18)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. and modified by Lee et al. to select the third antenna panel based on isolation levels as disclosed by Evans et al. in order to consider potential signal interference when switching to the third antenna panel. Consider claim 2 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., further disclose a UE wherein, to monitor the traffic level, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: monitor the traffic level of communications via the first frequency band based at least in part on the first frequency band overlapping with, being adjacent to, being a harmonic order to, or being an intermodulation order to the second frequency band ( “the UE 115 may perform a scan (or perform communications) on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT during the time period. In some examples, a scan of the second RAT during the time period may include an active scan where the UE 115 transmits on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT…The transmission may be scheduled to overlap communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of the first RAT” (see paragraph 0067)). Consider claim 3 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a UE wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: select an antenna for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level satisfying a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0024)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a UE wherein a third antenna panel is selected ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that a third antenna panel is selected as further taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. Consider claim 4 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a UE wherein, to select an antenna, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: select an antenna based at least in part on the traffic level exceeding a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT… In some examples of the method, apparatus, or non-transitory computer-readable medium described above, the demand requirement indicates that the communications are associated with a channel condition parameter above a threshold value.” (see paragraph 0024, 0027)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a UE wherein a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel as further taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above , HomChaudhuri et al. disclose wherein separate antenna are associated with the first radio access technology and an antenna panel associated with the second radio access technology (“ The UE 115 may be communicating on the radio frequency spectrum band in a first RAT (e.g., a WAN RAT) using multiple antennas)…[and] may reconfigure one antenna to a second RAT (e.g., a WLAN RAT) and perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0065)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein the antenna are specifically antenna panels, nor wherein the antenna are paired. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a UE where in the antenna are specifically antenna panels, nor wherein the antenna are paired (“ the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. such that the antenna are both paired and specifically antenna panels as taught by Lee et al. in order to take advantage of the directionality of panel antennae for long-distance transmission. However, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. fail to disclose wherein isolation level measurements are performed for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels. In the same field of endeavor, Evans et al. disclose a UE wherein isolation level measurements are performed for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels, ( “By selecting a subset of two transmit antennas and two receive antennas, it is likely that a combination of transmit and receive antennas can be chosen such that good isolation can be obtained at the receivers between the individual transmitter signals” (see Col. 4, lines 14-18)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. and modified by Lee et al. to perform isolation level measurements for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels as disclosed by Evans et al. in order to consider potential signal interference when selecting antenna pairs for transmission. Consider claim 8 , and as applied to claim 1 above , HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a UE wherein, to select an antenna, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: select any antenna from a set of antennae associated with the second radio access technology based at least in part on the traffic level being below a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0024)) However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein the antennae are panel antennae. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose wherein the antennae are panel antennae ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that the antennae are specifically panel antennae as further taught by Lee et al. in order to take advantage of the directionality of panel antennae for long-distance transmission. Consider claim 11 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., further disclose wherein the first radio access technology is associated with a higher priority than the second radio access technology (the UE “may include means for identifying a priority metric for communications during a time period on a radio frequency spectrum band of a first radio access technology (RAT), means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the priority metric, at least one antenna of a set of antennas to perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0018). Said priority metric “may indicate whether the first RAT communications are a high or low priority” (see paragraph 0067)). Consider claim 12 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose wherein the first radio access technology comprises one of wireless local area network, Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy, Ultra-wideband, and the second radio access technology comprises wireless wide area network (Referring to Figure 4, “the WLAN 405 may illustrate aspects of a wireless communication system that supports communications on a radio frequency spectrum band of a first RAT” (see paragraph 0099). Similarly, “the WAN 410 may illustrate aspects of a wireless communication system that supports communications on a radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0099)). Consider claim 13 , HomChaudhuri et al. disclose a method comprising: tuning a first antenna panel to a first frequency band associated with a first radio access technology (see Figure 1, “ The UE 115 may be communicating on the radio frequency spectrum band in a first RAT (e.g., a WAN RAT) using multiple antennas)” (see paragraph 0065)); tuning a second antenna panel to a second frequency band associated with a second radio access technology (“ The UE 115 may reconfigure one antenna to a second RAT (e.g., a WLAN RAT) and perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0065)); monitoring a traffic level of communications via the first frequency band associated with the first radio access technology (see Figure 1, “The UE 115 may determine a demand requirement for the first RAT communications, e.g., whether the throughput requirement for each link is exceeded for the first RAT communications, based on the link signal strength/quality, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the first RAT communications, etc.” (see paragraph 0068)); and select an antenna for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level of active antennas ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0024)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. such that a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels as taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. However, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. fail to disclose wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels. In the same field of endeavor Evans et al. disclose a wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels ( “By selecting a subset of two transmit antennas and two receive antennas, it is likely that a combination of transmit and receive antennas can be chosen such that good isolation can be obtained at the receivers between the individual transmitter signals” (see Col. 4, lines 14-18)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. and modified by Lee et al. to select the third antenna panel based on isolation levels as disclosed by Evans et al. in order to consider potential signal interference when switching to the third antenna panel. Consider claim 14, and as applied to claim 13 above , HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., further disclose wherein monitoring the traffic level comprises: monitoring the traffic level of communications via the first frequency band based at least in part on the first frequency band overlapping with, being adjacent to, being a harmonic order to, or being an intermodulation order to the second frequency band ( “the UE 115 may perform a scan (or perform communications) on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT during the time period. In some examples, a scan of the second RAT during the time period may include an active scan where the UE 115 transmits on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT…The transmission may be scheduled to overlap communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of the first RAT” (see paragraph 0067)). Consider claim 15 , and as applied to claim 13 above, HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a method wherein selecting the antenna comprises: selecting an antenna for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level exceeding a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT… In some examples of the method, apparatus, or non-transitory computer-readable medium described above, the demand requirement indicates that the communications are associated with a channel condition parameter above a threshold value.” (see paragraph 0024, 0027)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a method wherein a third antenna panel is selected ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that a third antenna panel is selected as further taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. Consider claim 16 , and as applied to claim 13 above, HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a method wherein selecting an antenna comprises: selecting an antenna based at least in part on the traffic level exceeding a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT… In some examples of the method, apparatus, or non-transitory computer-readable medium described above, the demand requirement indicates that the communications are associated with a channel condition parameter above a threshold value.” (see paragraph 0024, 0027)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a method wherein a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that a third antenna panel is selected different from the second antenna panel as further taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. Consider claim 17, and as applied to claim 13 above , HomChaudhuri et al. disclose a method further comprising: wherein separate antenna are associated with the first radio access technology and an antenna panel associated with the second radio access technology (“ The UE 115 may be communicating on the radio frequency spectrum band in a first RAT (e.g., a WAN RAT) using multiple antennas)…[and] may reconfigure one antenna to a second RAT (e.g., a WLAN RAT) and perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0065)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein the antenna are specifically antenna panels, nor wherein the antenna are paired. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a method where in the antenna are specifically antenna panels, nor wherein the antenna are paired (“ the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. such that the antenna are both paired and specifically antenna panels as taught by Lee et al. in order to take advantage of the directionality of panel antennae for long-distance transmission. However, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. fail to disclose wherein isolation level measurements are performed for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels. In the same field of endeavor, Evans et al. disclose a method wherein isolation level measurements are performed for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels, ( “By selecting a subset of two transmit antennas and two receive antennas, it is likely that a combination of transmit and receive antennas can be chosen such that good isolation can be obtained at the receivers between the individual transmitter signals” (see Col. 4, lines 14-18)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. and modified by Lee et al. to perform isolation level measurements for antenna panels of different pairs of antenna panels as disclosed by Evans et al. in order to consider potential signal interference when selecting antenna pairs for transmission. Consider claim 18 , and as applied to claim 13 above , HomChaudhuri et al. further disclose a method wherein selecting the antenna comprises: selecting any antenna from a set of antennae associated with the second radio access technology based at least in part on the traffic level being below a threshold traffic level ( “determining, for at least one antenna of the set of antennas, that a demand requirement associated with the communications is below a threshold level and means for reconfiguring, based at least in part on the demand requirement, the at least one antenna of the set of antennas to perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of a second RAT” (see paragraph 0024)) However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein the antennae are panel antennae. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose wherein the antennae are panel antennae ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the method disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., such that the antennae are specifically panel antennae as further taught by Lee et al. in order to take advantage of the directionality of panel antennae for long-distance transmission. Consider claim 19 , HomChaudhuri et al. discloses a user equipment for wireless communication comprising: means for tuning a first antenna panel to a first frequency band associated with a first radio access technology (see Figure 10, the processor 1020 is configured such that it may be equated to the communications manager 720, further comprising the tuning component 725, traffic component 730, and selection component 735. “The memory 1010 may store computer-readable, computer-executable software including instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to perform various functions described herein” (see paragraph 0168). The processor 1020 is part of the UE 115-f. In the broader 115 configuration, “ The UE 115 may be communicating on the radio frequency spectrum band in a first RAT (e.g., a WAN RAT) using multiple antennas)” (see Figure 1, paragraph 0065)); means for tuning a second antenna panel to a second frequency band associated with a second radio access technology (see Figure 1, “ The UE 115 may reconfigure one antenna to a second RAT (e.g., a WLAN RAT) and perform a scan on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0065)); means for monitoring a traffic level of communications via the first frequency band associated with the first radio access technology (see Figure 1, “The UE 115 may determine a demand requirement for the first RAT communications, e.g., whether the throughput requirement for each link is exceeded for the first RAT communications, based on the link signal strength/quality, a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the first RAT communications, etc.” (see paragraph 0068)); and means for selecting an antenna for communications via the second frequency band based at least in part on the traffic level of active antennas (see Figure 4, at block 425 “the UE 115- c may reconfigure the first antenna to support communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT. The UE 115-c may reconfigure the first antenna based on the demand requirement being below the threshold level. At 430, the UE 115- c may perform communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT” (see paragraph 0105)). However, HomChaudhuri et al. fail to disclose wherein a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels. In the same field of endeavor, Lee et al. disclose a means for selecting a third antenna panel separate from the first and second antenna panels ( “the electronic device 120 may select panel antennas remaining by excluding panel antennas of which a power consumption value exceeds the threshold power value from the plurality of panel antennas…the electronic device 120 may perform beamforming according to the third panel antenna 310-3, the fourth panel antenna 310-4, and a combination thereof by excluding the first panel antenna 310-1 to the second panel antenna 310-2” (see Figure 4, paragraph 0084)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the means disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. such that a third antenna panel is selected separate from the first and second antenna panels as taught by Lee et al. in order to effectively distribute excess traffic load. However, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. fail to disclose wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels. In the same field of endeavor, Evans et al. disclose wherein antenna are selected based on isolation levels ( “By selecting a subset of two transmit antennas and two receive antennas, it is likely that a combination of transmit and receive antennas can be chosen such that good isolation can be obtained at the receivers between the individual transmitter signals” (see Col. 4, lines 14-18)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the means disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. and modified by Lee et al. such that antenna are selected based on isolation level as disclosed by Evans et al. in order to consider potential signal interference when switching to the third antenna panel. Consider claim 20 , and as applied to claim 19 , HomChaudhuri et al., as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al., further disclose a means for monitoring the traffic level comprise: means for monitoring the traffic level of communications via the first frequency band based at least in part on the first frequency band overlapping with, being adjacent to, being a harmonic order to, or being an intermodulation order to the second frequency band (see Figure 10, the processor 1020 is configured such that it may be equated to the communications manager 820, further comprising the traffic component 830. “The memory 1010 may store computer-readable, computer-executable software including instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to perform various functions described herein” (see paragraph 0168). The processor 1020 is part of the UE 115-f. In the broader 115 configuration, “the UE 115 may perform a scan (or perform communications) on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT during the time period. In some examples, a scan of the second RAT during the time period may include an active scan where the UE 115 transmits on the radio frequency spectrum band of the second RAT…The transmission may be scheduled to overlap communications on the radio frequency spectrum band of the first RAT” (see paragraph 0067)) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over HomChaudhuri et al. (US 20170265205 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200328785 A1) further in view of Evans et al. (US 6774864 B2) and further in view of Li (US20230080333 A1) . Consider claim 9 , and as applied to claim 1 above , HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al. fail to disclose a UE wherein, to select the third antenna panel, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: select the third antenna panel based at least in part on whether a form factor state of the UE comprises a first form factor state or a second form factor state, the first form factor state comprising an open state and the second form factor state comprising a closed state. In the same field of endeavor, Li discloses wherein an antenna panel’s operability is based at least in part on whether a form factor state of the UE comprises a first form factor state or a second form factor state, the first form factor state comprising an open state and the second form factor state comprising a closed state (“after being activated, the antenna panels included in the first antenna panel set and the second antenna panel set are in a ready state. The antenna panel in the ready state may be used for sending and receiving information. If the antenna panel is not activated, the corresponding antenna panel is in a closed or dormant state, and cannot be used for sending and receiving information” (see paragraph 0038)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al. such that antenna panels are selected on the basis of their open or closed state as taught by Li in order to preclude attempts to transmit from closed and therefore nonfunctional antennae . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over HomChaudhuri et al. (US 20170265205 A1) in view of Lee et al. (US 20200328785 A1) further in view of Evans et al. (US 6774864 B2) and further in view of Ogasahara (US 20080219166 A1) . Consider claim 10 , and as applied to claim 1 above, HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al. fail to disclose wherein, to monitor the traffic level, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: monitor a quantity of packets communicated via the first frequency band associated with the first radio access technology within a time window. In the same field of endeavor, Ogasahara discloses a UE wherein traffic level is determined by monitoring a quantity of packets communicated via the first frequency band within a time window (see Figure 2, “traffic rate measuring units 470-1, 470-2 measure a communication band (communication rate) of a fairness controlled traffic packet transmitted from the local node which serves as the source” , as well as “communication bands (communication rates) of traffic packets other than Class A0” (see paragraph 0085), wherein “rate” implies that the measuring is done on the basis of an elapsed time window). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the disclosed invention to modify the UE disclosed by HomChaudhuri et al. as modified by Lee et al. and Evans et al. such that the traffic rate is determined by monitoring a quantity of packets communicated via the first frequency band within a time window as taught by Ogasahara in order to define a discrete metric by which antenna load can be measured . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 6 and 7 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Consider claim 6 , the best prior art found during the examination of the present application, HomChaudhuri et al. and Lee et al., fail to disclose specifically the limitation of “wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: generate a first list of antenna panels, a second list of antenna panels, or both, wherein the first list comprises antenna panels associated with the second radio access technology and that correspond to antenna panel pairs that exceed a threshold isolation level, and wherein the second list comprises antenna panels associated with the second radio access technology and that correspond to antenna panel pairs that are below the threshold isolation level”. Dependent claim 7 is allowed by virtue of its dependency on claim 6 . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER WU whose telephone number is (571)272-3360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, RAFAEL PEREZ-GUTIERREZ can be reached at (571)272-7915. 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 httos://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. /ALEXANDER WU/Examiner, Art Unit 2642 /Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 2 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 3 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 4 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 6 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 7 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 8 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 9 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 10 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 11 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 12 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 13 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 14 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 15 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 16 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 17 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 18 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 19 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 20 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 21 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 22 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 23 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 24 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 25 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 26 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 27 Art Unit: 2642 Application/Control Number: 18/736,235 Page 28 Art Unit: 2642
Prosecution Insights