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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to an amendment/response filed 8/21/2026.
No claims have been cancelled.
No claims have been added.
Claims 1-30 are now pending.
Applicant’s amendments to the Drawings have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 9/6/2024.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) (pages 14-16) in a reply filed 8/21/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 13-21, and 24-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal et al. US 10291310 (hereinafter “Gopal”) in view of Yan et al. US 20190068260 (hereinafter “Yan”) and in further view of Ramkumar et al. US 20150094003 (hereinafter “Ramkumar”)
As to claim 1, 13, 24, and 27 (claim 1 is the method claim for the UE, apparatus, and non-transitory computer-readable medium in claim 13, 27, and 24 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), (“In another aspect, a user equipment is provided. The UE may include multiple antennas, one or more receivers, and a processor coupled with the one or more receivers.”, Gopal [5]) comprising: communicating using a first antenna and a second antenna, wherein a number of receiving radio frequency (RF) chains associated with the UE is less than a number of physical antennas, including the first antenna and the second antenna, associated with the UE; (FIG. 2, Gopal) (“Antenna switch diversity (Asdiv) may exploit spatial diversity despite the number of transmitters and receivers being less than the number of available antennas. A ML1 Asdiv manager may select a set of antennas among all available antennas and may switch antenna couplings from one configuration to another configuration.”, Gopal [39])
detecting an event associated with a component of the UE, wherein the event is associated with antenna switching and with the first antenna; (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64])
measuring, using the second antenna and the third antenna, one or more signals to obtain one or more measurement values based at least in part on switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna; (“At block 640, the second antenna set may be measured on the frequency band, based on one or more signals received on the second antenna set during the time gap. Various measurement operations may be performed during the time gap, for example, as described in block 410 with reference to FIG. 4 and as elaborated with reference to FIGS. 5A and 5B. A receive signal power (e.g., RSRP) may be measured from a signal received on the second antenna set during an antenna measurement gap. In some cases, sample capture and processing operations may be pipelined across multiple time gaps. For example, samples may be captured from one or more signals received during a time gap, and one or more metrics on the second antenna set may be generated based on samples captured during a previous time gap.”, Gopal [71])
Gopal as described above does not explicitly teach:
switching an RF chain from the first antenna to a third antenna based at least in part on the first antenna being impacted by the event being active;
and transmitting a communication using the second antenna or the third antenna based at least in part on the one or more measurement values.
However, Yan further teaches transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values which includes:
and transmitting a communication using the second antenna or the third antenna based at least in part on the one or more measurement values. (“At block 202, the method 200 may select, from a set of antennas, a subset of antennas for SRS transmission based on at least one antenna selection parameter. For example, in an aspect, the UE 110 may execute the antenna selection component 142 to select, from a set of antennas 144, a subset of antennas 146 for SRS 150 transmission based on at least one antenna selection parameter 148.”, Yan [0050]) (“In some aspects, the at least one antenna selection parameter 148 may correspond to an RSRP value. In some aspects, selecting the subset of antennas 146 for SRS 158 transmission may include determining an RSRP value for each antenna from the set of antennas 144, and selecting at least two antennas each having a highest RSRP value to form the subset of antennas 146.”, Yan [0052])
Gopal and Yan are analogous because they pertain to selecting an antenna for transmission.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values as described in Yan into Gopal. By modifying the method to include transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values as taught by Yan, the benefits of improved communication quality (Yan [0052] and Gopal [71]) are achieved.
The combination of Yan and Gopal as described above does not explicitly teach:
switching an RF chain from the first antenna to a third antenna based at least in part on the first antenna being impacted by the event being active;
However, Ramkumar further teaches switching antennas based on a triggering event which includes:
switching an RF chain from the first antenna to a third antenna based at least in part on the first antenna being impacted by the event being active; (FIG. 4, 6, 7, and 8) (“The wireless communication device 102 may determine 304 whether a reference signal received power (RSRP) 112 triggers a switch in transmit antennas 110. For example, the wireless communication device 102 may determine if an RSRP delta is greater than an RSRP high threshold or whether an RSRP delta average greater than an RSRP low threshold. This may be accomplished as described in connection with FIG. 5. If the RSRP 112 triggers a switch in transmit antennas 110, the wireless communication device 102 may switch 308 to transmitting using the second antenna 110b”, Ramkumar [0069])
Gopal, Ramkumar, and Yan are analogous because they pertain to selecting an antenna for transmission.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include switching antennas based on a triggering event as described in Ramkumar into Gopal as modified by Yan. By modifying the method to include switching antennas based on a triggering event as taught by Ramkumar, the benefits of improved communication quality (Yan [0052] and Gopal [71]) and improved receive and transmit performance (Ramkumar [0027]) are achieved.
As to claim 2, 14, and 28 (claim 2 is the method claim for the UE and apparatus in claim 14 and 28 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the UE is associated with at least a first group of antennas and a second group of antennas, wherein the first group of antennas includes a first one or more antennas, from the first antenna, the second antenna, and the third antenna, that are associated with a first physical area of the UE, and wherein the second group of antennas includes a second one or more antennas, from the first antenna, the second antenna, and the third antenna, that are associated with a second physical area of the UE. (“Two sets of antennas may be specified: a first set of one or more antennas (“first antenna set”) and a second set of one or more antennas (“second antenna set”), wherein the second antenna set is to be measured during a time gap.”, Gopal [3]) (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal)
As to claim 3, 15, and 29 (claim 3 is the method claim for the UE and apparatus in claim 15 and 29 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 2, wherein the first antenna is included in the first group of antennas, wherein the event is associated with the first group of antennas, and wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the event being associated with the first group of antennas. (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal) (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64]) (“At block 630, the one or more receiver may be switched to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped.”, Gopal [67]) (“the second antenna set may be non-overlapping with the first antenna set, meaning the first and second antenna sets do not include an antenna in common, such as, when the second antenna set contains the other two unused antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4) if the first antenna set contains Ant 1/2.”, Gopal [67])
As to claim 4, 16, and 30 (claim 4 is the method claim for the UE and apparatus in claim 16 and 30 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 2, wherein the first antenna is included in the first group of antennas, wherein the event is associated with the first group of antennas and with switching the first antenna to another antenna included in the first group of antennas, and wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the third antenna being included in the first group of antennas. (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal) (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64]) (“At block 630, the one or more receiver may be switched to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped.”, Gopal [67]) (“The second antenna set may be the same as the first antenna set (meaning both contain same antennas);”, Gopal [67])
As to claim 5 and 17 (claim 5 is the method claim for the UE in claim 17):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 2, wherein the first antenna is included in the first group of antennas, wherein the event is associated with the first group of antennas and with switching the first antenna to an antenna included in a group other than the first group of antennas, and wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the third antenna being included in the second group of antennas. (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal) (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64]) (“At block 630, the one or more receiver may be switched to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped.”, Gopal [67]) (“the second antenna set may be non-overlapping with the first antenna set, meaning the first and second antenna sets do not include an antenna in common, such as, when the second antenna set contains the other two unused antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4) if the first antenna set contains Ant 1/2.”, Gopal [67])
As to claim 6 and 18 (claim 6 is the method claim for the UE in claim 18):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 2, wherein the first antenna is included in the first group of antennas, wherein the event is associated with the first group of antennas not being used based at least in part on the detection of the event, (“The apparatus may also include means for switching the one or more receivers to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped, the second antenna set having another one of the multiple antennas”, Gopal [6]) (Examiner’s Note: this limitation is not clear so the Examiner interpreted this as not using the first group of antennas including the first antenna when the event happens and the antenna is switched) and wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the third antenna not being included in the first group of antennas. (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal) (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64]) (“At block 630, the one or more receiver may be switched to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped.”, Gopal [67]) (“the second antenna set may be non-overlapping with the first antenna set, meaning the first and second antenna sets do not include an antenna in common, such as, when the second antenna set contains the other two unused antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4) if the first antenna set contains Ant 1/2.”, Gopal [67])
As to claim 7, 19, and 25 (claim 7 is the method claim for the UE and non-transitory computer-readable medium in claim 19 and 25 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the event is associated with the first antenna being unavailable based at least in part on the detection of the event. (“The apparatus may also include means for switching the one or more receivers to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped, the second antenna set having another one of the multiple antennas”, Gopal [6]) (Examiner’s Note: the first antenna is unavailable during the time gap)
As to claim 8, 20, and 26 (claim 8 is the method claim for the UE and non-transitory computer-readable medium in claim 20 and 26 respectively):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the first antenna being associated with a transmitting RF chain prior to the detection of the event. (FIG. 2 shows that the transmitting RF chain can be connected to the first antenna, Gopal) (“In various aspects, one or more transmitters may be coupled with the first antenna set. The condition may be triggered if a transmit power on the first antenna set exceeds a power level for more than a threshold percentage of time.”, Gopal [8])
As to claim 9:
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein switching the RF chain from the first antenna to the third antenna is based at least in part on the event being associated with the first antenna. (FIG. 2 and FIG. 3, Gopal) (“At block 620, it may be determined that a condition on the first antenna set is triggered. The condition may be related to performance of antenna switch diversity. A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64]) (“At block 630, the one or more receiver may be switched to a second antenna set during a time gap in which reception on the first antenna set can be skipped.”, Gopal [67]) (“the second antenna set may be non-overlapping with the first antenna set, meaning the first and second antenna sets do not include an antenna in common, such as, when the second antenna set contains the other two unused antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4) if the first antenna set contains Ant 1/2.”, Gopal [67])
As to claim 10 and 21 (claim 10 is the method claim for the UE in claim 21):
Gopal discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more measurement values include a first one or more measurement values associated with the second antenna and a second one or more measurement values associated with the third antenna, (“To reduce disruption to active communication on the frequency band, measurement of different or additional antennas may be scheduled during a gap of time in which reception and/or transmission on the currently coupled antennas can be skipped. During such a gap, a UE may switch (or tune away) to one or more additional antennas, measure these antennas on the frequency band, and switch (or tune back) to the antennas previously in use.”, Gopal [45]) (“A UE may monitor a “trigger” condition for measuring additional or different antennas (e.g., Ant 3/4), e.g., as described in blocks 404 and 406 with reference to FIG. 4. In some cases, the condition may be triggered if a transmit power (e.g., MTPL) on the first antenna set exceeds a power level (e.g., a maximum power level) for more than a threshold percentage of time. The percentage threshold may be adjusted based on a tolerance for fluctuation in transmit power.”, Gopal [64])
Gopal as described above does not explicitly teach:
and wherein transmitting the communication using the second antenna or the third antenna comprises: transmitting the communication using an antenna, from the second antenna and the third antenna, that is associated with higher measurement values from the first one or more measurement values and the second one or more measurement values.
However, Yan further teaches transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values which includes:
and wherein transmitting the communication using the second antenna or the third antenna comprises: transmitting the communication using an antenna, from the second antenna and the third antenna, that is associated with higher measurement values from the first one or more measurement values and the second one or more measurement values. (“At block 202, the method 200 may select, from a set of antennas, a subset of antennas for SRS transmission based on at least one antenna selection parameter. For example, in an aspect, the UE 110 may execute the antenna selection component 142 to select, from a set of antennas 144, a subset of antennas 146 for SRS 150 transmission based on at least one antenna selection parameter 148.”, Yan [0050]) (“In some aspects, the at least one antenna selection parameter 148 may correspond to an RSRP value. In some aspects, selecting the subset of antennas 146 for SRS 158 transmission may include determining an RSRP value for each antenna from the set of antennas 144, and selecting at least two antennas each having a highest RSRP value to form the subset of antennas 146.”, Yan [0052])
Gopal and Yan are analogous because they pertain to selecting an antenna for transmission.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values as described in Yan into Gopal. By modifying the method to include transmitting using another antenna based on measurement values as taught by Yan, the benefits of improved communication quality (Yan [0052] and Gopal [71]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 11, 12, 22, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal in view of Yan and Ramkumar, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. US 20180138991 (hereinafter “Wang”)
As to claim 11 and 22 (claim 11 is the method claim for the UE in claim 22):
The combination of Gopal, Ramkumar, and Yan as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the detection of the event comprises detecting that the component is active.
However, Wang further teaches event detection which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the detection of the event comprises detecting that the component is active. (“Step 103: Determine whether the antenna is interfered by a signal generated by the camera.”, Wang [0046]) (“A signal may be generated after the camera is started, and the signal probably enters the antenna and affects communication of the antenna. Therefore, to prevent the signal generated by the started camera from affecting the antenna, whether the antenna is interfered by the signal generated by the camera needs to be determined.”, Wang [0047])
Gopal, Ramkumar, Wang, and Yan are analogous because they pertain to mitigating antenna interference.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include event detection as described in Wang into Gopal as modified by Yan and Ramkumar. By modifying the method to include event detection as taught by Wang, the benefits of improved communication quality (Yan [0052], Wang [0047], and Gopal [71]) and improved receive and transmit performance (Ramkumar [0027]) are achieved.
As to claim 12 and 23 (claim 12 is the method claim for the UE in claim 23):
The combination of Gopal, Ramkumar, and Yan as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 1, wherein the component includes a camera.
However, Wang further teaches camera event detection which includes:
The method of claim 1, wherein the component includes a camera. (“Step 103: Determine whether the antenna is interfered by a signal generated by the camera.”, Wang [0046]) (“A signal may be generated after the camera is started, and the signal probably enters the antenna and affects communication of the antenna. Therefore, to prevent the signal generated by the started camera from affecting the antenna, whether the antenna is interfered by the signal generated by the camera needs to be determined.”, Wang [0047]) (FIG. 6 and 7, Wang)
Gopal, Wang, Ramkumar, and Yan are analogous because they pertain to mitigating antenna interference.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include camera event detection as described in Wang into Gopal as modified by Yan and Ramkumar. By modifying the method to include camera event detection as taught by Wang, the benefits of improved communication quality (Yan [0052], Wang [0047], and Gopal [71]) and improved receive and transmit performance (Ramkumar [0027]) are achieved.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW C KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM (PST).
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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/A.C.K./
Examiner
Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights