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 § 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bali et al. (US 20220182742) in view of YU et al. (US 20260005728).
Regarding claim 1, Bali teaches a node apparatus (Fig. 8) comprising: a Distributed Unit (DU) (Fig. 8A, 506 DUe); and a Radio Unit (RU) (Fig. 8A, 808 MIMO RU) in communication with the DU, wherein the RU comprises: a first port for interfacing with the coexisting signal transmitted (Fig. 9A Synchronization derived from cable) from the DU; a Digital Front End (DFE) ([0288]A transmitter/receiver architecture generally symmetrical to the transmitter/receiver of the node 509 discussed previously is used; i.e., impedance matching circuitry, diplexer, synchronization circuit, tilt, etc. are used as part of the CPEe RF front end); a customer premises equipment (CPE) apparatus, comprising: a port to interface with the coaxial cable, the coaxial cable configured to transmit the coexisting signal; and a modem configured to transmit to one or more user equipment (Fig. 10b, [0318] the individual air interface modems are also performed by the device, including baseband management (e.g., transmit and receive functions via the baseband processor 1035 and associated Tx and Rx chains of the RF front end 1036 and their MIMO or spatially diverse antenna elements 1040a, 1040b).
However, Bali does not expressly teach wherein the coexisting signal transmitted from the DU comprises at least an 8 layer spatial stream, configured to process the spatial stream by combining a first four streams of the spatial stream in a first Digital to Analog (DAC) converter to form a first signal, and by combining a second four streams of the spatial stream in a second DAC, to form a second signal; and a second port in communication with a coaxial cable, wherein the coaxial cable is configured to transmit the combined signal; YU teaches 8 layer spatial stream, see Fig. 7A, 750-1, 750-2, 750-3, 750-4 and 750-5, 750-6, 750-7, 750-8, and [0188] each of the RF analog circuits may include a digital to analog converter (DAC), and [0119] the fronthaul 215 may be formed of an optical cable (or optical fiber cable). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine with YU since a channel capacity of the wireless communication system using the MIMO technology may be significantly improved ([0003], YU).
Regarding claim 5, Bali teaches a filter configured to receive the coexisting signal from the node and configured to output the coexisting signal to the CPE (Fig. 10b and [0070] the RF transceiver 360 may include a transmission filter, a reception filter).
Regarding claim 6, YU teaches Fig. 8B, 965s, a 16 layer spatial stream, that is converted from a frequency domain to a time domain by the RU. However, neither Bali nor YU expressly teaches the at least 8 layer spatial stream is a 24 layer spatial stream. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have a 24 layer spatial stream before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 9, Bali teaches wherein each layer of the spatial stream is mapped to a 100 MHZ wide channel ([0272] FIG. 8b shows a comparison of prior art LTE/LTE-A frequency bands and associated guard bands over a typical 100 MHz portion of the allocated frequency spectrum (top)).
Regarding claim 10, Bali teaches wherein the signal transmitted from the DU comprises a 2 GHz wide bandwidth, or wider (FIG. 9a, [0292] both 4G and 5G gNB block converters 932, 930 are included to support the RF chains for 4G and 5G communication respectively (i.e., for conversion of the IF-band signals received to the relevant RF frequencies of the 4G/5G interfaces and modems within the CPEe, such as in the 2 GHz band).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bali et al. (US 20220182742) modified by YU et al. (US 20260005728), and further in view of Yu et al. (US 20180025999, hereinafter Yu-999).
Regarding claim 8, Bali teaches an impedance matching component configured to match impedance ([0258] A tilt stage 812 is also utilized prior to the diplexer stage 814 and impedance matching stage 816). Nether Bali nor YU expressly teaches for loads in a 50-7562 range. Yu-999 teaches [0042] affecting the impedance matching of the antenna (e.g., the dipole antenna 117)… for an operation frequency in a range from about 50 GHz to about 80 GHz (e.g., 60 GHz), the first length L.sub.antenna is in a range between about 500 μm to about 800 μm (e.g., 750 μm), the second length L.sub.match is in a range between 550 μm to about 700 μm (e.g., 650 μm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine with Yu-999 in order to enable production of semiconductor devices with enhanced functionalities ([0002], Yu-999).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bali et al. (US 20220182742) in view of YU et al. (US 20260005728), further in view of KITANO (US 20120268336).
Regarding claim 16, neither Bali nor YU teaches wherein the coaxial cable transmits up to a 2400 MHz wideband spectrum. KITANO teaches claim 6, the electromagnetic wave radiation coaxial cable according to claim 1, a frequency of the radio frequency signal is within a range from 800 MHz to 2400 MHz. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine with KITANO in order to provide an electromagnetic wave radiation coaxial cable, which is capable of radiating a circular polarized wave when the radio frequency signal is input ([0010], KITANO).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4, 7, 11-15, 17- 20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNSOOK CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-1822. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hassan Phillips can be reached on 5712723940. 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.
/EUNSOOK CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights