DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17 – 21, 23, 27 – 32, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kludt et al. (US 2015/0237510).
Regarding Claim 17, Kludt teaches a method performed by a device for adjusting a pointing direction of an antenna, wherein the antenna is operable to generate a set of N beams, where N > 2, (Section 0057, multibeam access point (AP) system) the method comprising: obtaining a first beam use data set associated with a first period of time, wherein, for each beam in the set of N beams, the first beam use data set comprises a first beam quality value indicating a quality of the beam (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), the periodic monitoring of the signal quality renders periods of time for said monitoring); based on the first beam use data set, determining whether to adjust a pointing direction of the antenna (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna); and as a result of determining to adjust the pointing direction of the antenna, initiating an adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna based on the first beam use data set (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna).
Regarding Claim 28, Kludt teaches a device comprising: processing circuitry operably coupled to an antenna that is operable to generate a set of N beams, where N > 2; and a memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry (Section 0057, multibeam AP system, typical access points comprise processors that run executable code stored in memory), wherein execution of the instructions by the processing circuitry configures the device to: obtain a first beam use data set associated with a first period of time, wherein, for each beam included in the set of N beams, the first beam use data set comprises a first beam quality value indicating a quality of the beam (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), the periodic monitoring of the signal quality renders periods of time for said monitoring); based on the first beam use data set, determine whether to adjust a pointing direction of the antenna (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna); and as a result of a determination to adjust the pointing direction of the antenna, initiate an adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna based on the first beam use data set (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna).
Regarding Claims 18, 29, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 28. Kludt further teaches wherein determining whether to adjust a pointing direction of the antenna comprises selecting at least a first beam from the set of N beams based on the first beam use data set, wherein the first beam use data set indicates that none of the unselected beams from the set of N beams has a quality greater than the quality of the selected first beam (Sections 0050, 0072, the beams selected would be the beams that provide the best improvement in signal quality); the selected first beam has a pointing direction (Sections 0050, 0072, beams are steered or pointed in a direction); and initiating the adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna is based on the pointing direction of the selected first beam (Sections 0050, 0072, the steering or pointing of beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing the antenna).
Regarding Claims 19, 30, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 18, 29. Kludt further teaches wherein the adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna is initiated such that the antenna will point in the same direction as the selected first beam (Sections 0050, 0072, antenna electronically points in the same direction as the beams coming from said antenna).
Regarding Claims 20, 31, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 28. Kludt further teaches after initiating the adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna based on the first beam use data set, obtaining a second beam use data set associated with a second period of time that is subsequent to the first period of time (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), the periodic monitoring of the signal quality renders periods of time for said monitoring, steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna), wherein, for each beam in the set of N beams, the second beam use data set comprises a second beam quality value indicating a quality of the beam (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072)); and based on the second beam use data set, determining whether the antenna needs a further adjustment (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072)).
Regarding Claims 21, 32, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 20. Kludt further teaches as a result of determining that the antenna needs a further adjustment, initiating the further adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna based on the second beam use data set (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072), the periodic monitoring of the signal quality renders periods of time for said monitoring, steering or pointing the beams from the antenna is effectively electronically pointing said antenna).
Regarding Claims 23, 34, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 28. Kludt further teaches wherein: the set of N beams comprises a first beam and a second beam (Section 0057, multibeam access point (AP) system thus a plurality of beams); and the method further comprises generating the first beam use data set based on calculating a first beam quality value for the first beam and calculating a first beam quality value for the second beam (signal quality in beams is monitored periodically and the appropriate beams are steered or pointed such that the signal quality is improved (Sections 0050, 0072)).
Regarding Claim 27, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 17. Kludt further teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing a computer program comprising instructions that, when executed by processing circuitry of a device, cause the device to perform the method of claim 17 (Section 0057, typical APs comprise processors that run executable code stored in memory).
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, 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) 22, 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kludt et al. (US 2015/0237510) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2020/0059285).
Regarding Claims 22, 33, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 28. Kludt does not teach wherein for each beam in the set of N beams, the beam quality value in the first beam use data set specifies the total number of times the beam was used within the first period of time.
Zhang, which also teaches the use of beams, teaches wherein for each beam in the set of N beams, the beam quality value in the first beam use data set specifies the total number of times the beam was used within the first period of time (Section 0079, beam recovery process renders a particular beam being used multiple times over multiple recovery processes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kludt with the above features of Zhang for the purpose of allowing a communication session to be maintained despite physical obstructions as taught by Zhang.
Claim(s) 25, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kludt et al. (US 2015/0237510) in view of Wu et al. (US 2013/0009819)
Regarding Claims 25, 36, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 28. Kludt does not teach wherein initiating the adjustment of the pointing direction of the antenna comprises one of the following: sending a control signal to a motor configured to move the antenna; or indicating to an end user that the antenna needs an adjustment.
Wu, which also teaches use of access points, teaches sending a control signal to a motor configured to move the antenna; or indicating to an end user that the antenna needs an adjustment (Section 0020).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kludt with the above features of Wu for the purpose of enabling the access point to operate as an outdoor access point with improved received signal strength as taught by Wu.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kludt et al. (US 2015/0237510) in view of Muralidhar (US 2020/0235974)
Regarding Claim 26, Kludt teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 17. Kludt does not teach wherein the device is a user equipment (UE) and the antenna is a component of the UE.
Muralidhar, which also teaches the use of access points, teaches wherein the device is a user equipment (UE) and the antenna is a component of the UE (Section 0166, master UE acts as a hotspot or access point).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kludt with the above features of Muralidhar for the purpose of accommodating a greater number of users as taught by Muralidhar.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24, 35 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious the following features:
wherein the first beam quality value for the first beam is calculated according to qv + W, wherein qv is a stored quality value associated with the first beam and W is a weight value that depends on a link throughput measured while the first beam was being used to transmit or receive data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND S DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7877. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00-2:30, EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony S Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/RAYMOND S DEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 Raymond S. Dean
July 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights