Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This Office Action is in response to application filed on 10/21/2024. Claims 1-14, 16-18 were previously pending. Claims 1-14, 16-18 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
4.1. The drawing(s) FIG.4 is/are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(m) because the text of the arrows are not clearly legible.
4.2. The drawings FIG.12 are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) S501-S521 mentioned in the description PGPub [.0132- 153]
4.3. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 1, 3, 8, 16-17 are objected to because
- Claims 1, 3, 8, 16-17 recite the limitation "first signal" in lines 13-14, line 2, line 2, lines 16-17, lines 15-16 respectively; There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
- Claims 1, 16-17 recite the limitation "second signal" in line 15, line 18, line 17 respectively. There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
- Claims 1, 16-17, recite the limitation "the plurality of stages” in line 8, line 1, line 10 respectively, should be –each stage of the plurality of stages—in light of PGPub [0054].
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 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.
6.1. 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.
6.2. 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.
6.3. Claim(s) 1-9, 11-14, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Guarin et al., (“Guarin”, US 2018/0262283 A1) in view of Wei et al., (“Wei”, US 2019/0053194 A1), and further in view of Balakrishnan et al., (“Bala”, US 2021/0258988 A1),
Regarding Claim 1, Guarin teaches, An interference detection method, comprising (Guarin, [0025]: a method of interference detection):
performing a plurality of stages of detection processing according to the signal data to obtain interference detection results of the plurality of stages (Guarin, FIG.2, interference counter 118, interference detection circuit 244, 248, 252, receiver circuit 262, 264, 266, 268, [003-331]: a plurality of interference detection circuits 244, 248, 252 being applied to three individual receiver stages, and configured to detect a saturation counter 118 (“interference counter”) from at least one of the plurality of the receiver circuits 262, 264, 266, 268; FIG.6, radio frequency (RF) signal 640, interference detection circuit 652, 648, 644 , RX 662, RX 662, [0047]: a plurality of interference detection circuits 652, 648, 644 are applied to three individual receiver stages, and configured to detect a interference counter 618 of a signal output RX 662 from the receiver circuits RF 640); and
obtaining a comprehensive interference detection result according to the interference detection results of the plurality of stages (Guarin, FIG.2, comparator 204, 214, 224, threshold 209, 219, 229, [0033-34]: an interference counter 118 configured to count a number of saturation events in at least one of the plurality of receiver circuits 262, 264, 266, 268 over a time limited period; The output of the digital counter 118 is input to a respective comparator 204, 214, 224, where the respective digital count value is compared to a threshold 209, 219, 229 for the respective counter 118, to determine whether the number of saturation events has caused the counter to increase and exceed a threshold),
wherein the plurality of stages of detection processing comprise:
performing sensing processing according to first signal data to obtain first sensing data, wherein the first signal data is obtained according to the collected signal data (Guarin, FIG.6, low noise amplification (LNA) 142. mixer 144, low-pass filter (LF) 146, analog signal processing (ASP) 610, interference detector 652, radio frequency (RF) 640 signal, [0047]: using ASP 610, effectively providing reception of a RF signal 640, LNA 142, mixer 144, LF 146 and in the analog domain (“1st signal data”); FIG. 6, first interference detector 652, [0044]: 1st interference detection 652 coupled to an output of mixer 144 and detect a saturation count of a signal output from RF 640 (“1st sensing data”));
performing aggregation processing on a plurality of pieces of first signal data and a plurality of pieces of first sensing data corresponding to the plurality of pieces of first signal data according to a data window length to obtain second signal data and second sensing data (Guarin, FIG.6, analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) 154, second interference detection circuit 648, digital filter 656, [0047]: a second interference detection circuit 648 is coupled to a digital output of the ADO 154 to determine whether a saturation counts (“2nd sensing data”) has received; The output signal of a digital filter 656 (“2nd signal data”) filters any harmonics of the output signal of the ADC 154; [0019-20]: when detecting a repeated occurrence of the saturation event over a time-limited period; e.g. different time-limited period (“data window length”) may be used in the next stage); and
obtaining an interference detection result according to the second signal data and the second sensing data (Guarin, [0033-34], claim 1: comparator 204, 214, coupled to the counter 118 and configured to compare a count value of the number of saturation events from the at least one counter with a counter threshold 209, 219 to indicate a presence of interference in the signal, when the counter threshold is exceeded).
Guarin does not explicitly teach
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to a preset time interval and a first dimension.
However, Wei teaches
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to a preset time interval a(Wei, [0029]: periodically performs a spectrum sensing for all the RBs according to, for example, a predetermined time interval (e.g., 20 ms, 40 ms, . . . , or 10240 ms) to obtain a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) of each of the RBs);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “collecting signal data of RB” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would detect interference of signal data of an RB in a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Wei, FIG.4).
Guarin-Wei does not explicitly teach
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to
However, Bala teaches
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to (Bala, [0081]: resource elements may be grouped into resource blocks consisting of 12 subcarriers in the frequency domain and one symbol in the time domain).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “collecting signal data of RB according to a first dimension” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would detect interference of signal data of an RB in the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0081]).
Regarding Claim 2, Guarin teaches, The method of claim 1.
Guarin does not explicitly teach
wherein the signal data is a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) of the RB.
However, Wei teaches
wherein the signal data is a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) of the RB (Wei, [0029]: obtain a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) of each of the RBs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “collecting RSSI of RB” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would detect RSSI of the signal data of an RB in the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Wei, [0029]).
Regarding Claim 3, Guarin teaches, The method of claim 2.
Guarin does not explicitly teach
comparing a plurality of RSSI values comprised in the first sensing data with an RSSI threshold to obtain comparison result indication values corresponding to the respective RSSI values;
obtaining the first sensing data according to the comparison result indication values corresponding to the respective RSSI values.
However, Wei teaches
respectively comparing a plurality of RSSI values comprised in the first sensing data with an RSSI threshold to obtain comparison result indication values corresponding to the respective RSSI values (Wei, [0029]: comparing the RSSI of each of the RBs is greater than a preset threshold, and uses the RBs with the RSSI not greater than the threshold as the available RBs); and
obtaining the first sensing data according to the comparison result indication values corresponding to the respective RSSI values (Wei, [0030]: record locations of the available RBs (i.e., with the measured RSSI not greater than the threshold) among all the RBs as 0 and record locations of occupied RBs (i.e., with the RSSI greater than the threshold) as 1 (“sensing data”)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “RSSI as inference signal” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would detect RSSI of the signal data of an RB in the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Wei, [0029]).
Regarding Claim 4, Guarin teaches, The method of claim 3.
Guarin does not explicitly teach
acquiring historical RSSI values of the RBs according to the first dimension;
performing clustering calculation according to the historical RSSI values to obtain the RSSI threshold.
However, Wei teaches
acquiring historical RSSI values of the RBs according to the first dimension (Wei, [0029]: periodically performs a spectrum sensing for all the RBs according to a predetermined time interval to obtain a RSSI of each of the RBs; [0065]: select location information of one or several dedicated RBs according to the cooperative RRSI previously generated (“historical RSSI”)); and
performing clustering calculation according to the historical RSSI values to obtain the RSSI threshold (It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform a clustering calculation on historical RSSI values to dynamically obtain an optimal threshold, e.g. a standard K-Means clustering workflow).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “historical RSSI” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would obtain RSSI threshold according to the historical RSSI in the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Wei, [0029]).
Regarding Claim 5, Guarin teaches, The method of claim 2, wherein obtaining an interference detection (648) result according to the second signal data and the second sensing data comprises:
combining the second signal data and the second sensing data to obtain first detection input data (It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to obtain first digital input by combing the generated second signal data (the output signal of a digital filter 656 and the second sensing data (saturation counts determined by the second interference detection circuit 648”)); and
inputting the first detection input data to a first interference detection (652) model (Guarin, FIG.6, [0044]: Input signal to the first interference detector 652 and output the detected saturation (interference) count of a first signal).
Guarin-Wei does not explicitly teach
inputting the first detection input data to a first interference detection model which has been trained,
However, Bala teaches
inputting the first detection input data to a first interference detection model which has been trained, (Bala, FIG.14, trained machine-learning (ML) program 1416, new data 1416, assessment 1420, [0208]: new data 1418 is provided as an input to the ML1416, and the ML program 1416 generates the assessment 1420 as output).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a trained ML program” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would input the signal data to a trained first interference detection model of the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0208]).
Regarding Claim 6, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 2, wherein the down-sampling processing comprises:
performing averaging on the second signal data according to the data window length to obtain the first signal data (claim 6 is rejected based on the same rationale used for claim 1. Because claim 6 is directed to a non-selected alternative limitation in the rejection of claim 1, claim 6 does not patentably distinguish over Guarin-Wei-Bala for the same reasons as claim 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 1.
Guarin-Wei does explicitly teach
wherein the signal data is a covariance matrix of the RB.
However, Bala teaches
wherein the signal data is a covariance matrix of the RB (Bala, [0155]: RSSI interference may be estimated at the node using a covariance matrix).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “covariance matrix of the RB” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would provide the signal data of a covariance matrix to a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0155]).
Regarding Claim 8, Guarin teaches, The method of claim 7, wherein performing sensing processing according to first signal data to obtain first sensing data comprises:
inputting the first signal data to a signal sensing model (648) (Guarin, FIG.6, [0044]: applied the first interference detector 652 to first signal data (output signal of mixer 144) and detect a saturation count of a signal output from RF 640 (“1st sensing data”);
Guarin-Wei does not explicitly teach
inputting the first signal data to a signal sensing model which has been trained,
However, Bala teaches
inputting the first signal data to a signal sensing model which has been trained, (Bala, FIG.14, trained machine-learning (ML) program 1416, new data 1416, assessment 1420, [0208]: new data 1418 is provided as an input to the ML1416, and the ML program 1416 generates the assessment 1420 as output).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “trained signal sensing model” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would provide signal data to a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0155]).
Regarding Claim 9, Guarin-Wei teaches, The method of claim 8.
Guarin-Wei does not explicitly teach
wherein the first sensing data comprises at least one of: whether energy is present, a horizontal angle, and a pitch angle.
However, Bala teaches
wherein the first sensing data comprises at least one of: whether energy is present, (Bala, [0166]: the node may observe the energy per band to observe in which a sudden increase in received signal energy follow a probe transmission).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “energy” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would provide energy presented signal data to a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0155]).
Regarding Claim 11, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 7, wherein the down-sampling processing comprises:
performing filtering according to the second signal data to obtain a current filtering result; and acquiring a filtering result of a previous stage, and obtaining the first signal data according to the data window length, the current filtering result, and the filtering result of the previous stage (claim 11 is rejected based on the same rationale used for claim 1. Because claim 11 is directed to a non-selected alternative limitation in the rejection of claim 1, claim 11 does not patentably distinguish over Guarin-Wei-Bala for the same reasons as claim 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 1, wherein the interference detection result comprises interference category information and interference location information (Guarin, [0022]: a range of interference detection locations within the receiver may be supported. Furthermore, isolation of a particular interference problem may be identified and/or compensated for, due for example to a faulty internal component or circuit. [0048]: the interference detection system is monitored with a flag based interference identification system).
Regarding Claim 13, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of stages of detection processing corresponds to a different data window length (Guarin, [0019-20]: when detecting a repeated occurrence of the saturation event over a time-limited period; e.g. different time-limited period (“data window length”) may be used in the next stage).
Regarding Claim 14, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining a comprehensive interference detection result according to the interference detection results of the plurality of stages comprises:
for the interference detection result of each of the plurality of stages, in response to the interference detection result comprising interference category information and interference location information, determining that interference exists at a time granularity corresponding to the interference detection result (Guarin, [0022]: a plurality of parallel interference detection circuits may be connected to a plurality of receiver channels in order to identify a saturation event in at least one of the plurality of receiver channels over the time limited period. In this manner, a range of interference detection locations within the receiver may be supported. Furthermore, isolation of a particular interference problem may be identified and/or compensated for, due for example to a faulty internal component or circuit.).
Regarding Claim 16, Guarin teaches, An electronic device (114), comprising:
a processor (Guarin, FIG.6, microcontroller 114, timer 116, [0045]: the microcontroller 114 and a timer 116 configured to determine the performance of the radar unit (“interference detection”), in response to the level of the received signal(s));
performing a plurality of stages of detection processing according to the signal data to obtain interference detection results of the plurality of stages (Guarin, FIG.2, interference counter 118, interference detection circuit 244, 248, 252, receiver circuit 262, 264, 266, 268, [003-331]: a plurality of interference detection circuits 244, 248, 252 being applied to three individual receiver stages, and configured to detect a saturation counter 118 (“interference counter”) from at least one of the plurality of the receiver circuits 262, 264, 266, 268; FIG.6, radio frequency (RF) signal 640, interference detection circuit 652, 648, 644 , RX 662, RX 662, [0047]: a plurality of interference detection circuits 652, 648, 644 are applied to three individual receiver stages, and configured to detect a interference counter 618 of a signal output RX 662 from the receiver circuits RF 640); and
obtaining a comprehensive interference detection result according to the interference detection results of the plurality of stages (Guarin, FIG.2, comparator 204, 214, 224, threshold 209, 219, 229, [0033-34]: an interference counter 118 configured to count a number of saturation events in at least one of the plurality of receiver circuits 262, 264, 266, 268 over a time limited period; The output of the digital counter 118 is input to a respective comparator 204, 214, 224, where the respective digital count value is compared to a threshold 209, 219, 229 for the respective counter 118, to determine whether the number of saturation events has caused the counter to increase and exceed a threshold);
wherein the plurality of stages of detection processing comprise:
performing sensing processing according to first signal data to obtain first sensing data, wherein the first signal data is obtained according to the collected signal data (Guarin, FIG.6, low noise amplification (LNA) 142. mixer 144, low-pass filter (LF) 146, analog signal processing (ASP) 610, interference detector 652, radio frequency (RF) 640 signal, [0047]: using ASP 610, effectively providing reception of a RF signal 640, LNA 142, mixer 144, LF 146 and in the analog domain (“1st signal data”); FIG. 6, first interference detector 652, [0044]: 1st interference detection 652 coupled to an output of mixer 144 and detect a saturation count of a signal output from RF 640 (“1st sensing data”));
performing aggregation processing on a plurality of pieces of first signal data and a plurality of pieces of first sensing data corresponding to the plurality of pieces of first signal data according to a data window length to obtain second signal data and second sensing data (Guarin, FIG.6, analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) 154, second interference detection circuit 648, digital filter 656, [0047]: a second interference detection circuit 648 is coupled to a digital output of the ADO 154 to determine whether a saturation counts (“2nd sensing data”) has received; The output signal of a digital filter 656 (“2nd signal data”) filters any harmonics of the output signal of the ADC 154; [0019-20]: when detecting a repeated occurrence of the saturation event over a time-limited period; e.g. different time-limited period (“data window length”) may be used in the next stage); and
obtaining an interference detection result according to the second signal data and the second sensing data (Guarin, [0033-34], claim 1: comparator 204, 214, coupled to the counter 118 and configured to compare a count value of the number of saturation events from the at least one counter with a counter threshold 209, 219 to indicate a presence of interference in the signal, when the counter threshold is exceeded).
Guarin does not explicitly teach
a ;
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to a preset time interval and a first dimension.
However, Wei teaches
a (34) stores program instructions which, when executed by the processor (36), cause the processor to perform an interference detection method, the method comprising (Wei, FIG.3, storage device 34, processor 36, [0026-27]: the storage device 34 is configured to record computer commands or programs accessible and executable by the processor 36);
collecting signal data of a Resource Block (RB) according to a preset time interval (Wei, [0029]: periodically performs a spectrum sensing for all the RBs according to, for example, a predetermined time interval (e.g., 20 ms, 40 ms, . . . , or 10240 ms) to obtain a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) of each of the RBs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “collecting signal data of RB” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would detect interference of signal data of an RB in a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Wei, FIG.4).
Guarin-Wei does not explicitly teach
However, Bala teaches
(Bala, [0081]: resource elements may be grouped into resource blocks consisting of 12 subcarriers in the frequency domain and one symbol in the time domain)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “collecting signal data of RB according to a first dimension” as taught by Bala in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei, so that it would detect interference of signal data of an RB in the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0081]).
Regarding Claim 17 see similar rejection to Claim 1
Regarding Claim 18, Guarin does not explicitly teach, A computer program product, storing computer instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method claim 1.
However, Wei teaches
A computer program product, storing computer instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform the method claim 1 (Wei, FIG.3, storage device 34, processor 36, [0026-27]: the storage device 34 is configured to record computer commands or programs accessible and executable by the processor 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “computer program product” as taught by Wei in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin, so that it would execute the computer program product to perform the method of the multiple stages of the interference detection system (Bala, [0081]).
6.4. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Guarin et al., (“Guarin”, US 2018/0262283 A1) in view of Wei et al., (“Wei”, US 2019/0053194 A1) and Balakrishnan et al., (“Bala”, US 2021/0258988 A1), and further in view of Sun et al., (“Sun”, WO 2006/114045 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Guarin-Wei-Bala teaches, The method of claim 8, wherein obtaining an interference detection result according to the second signal data and the second sensing data comprises:
combining the third signal data and the second sensing data to obtain second detection input data (Guarin, FIG.6, It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to obtain second digital input by combing the generated third signal data (the output signal of a digital filter 660 and the third sensing data (saturation counts determined by the third interference detection circuit 644”)); and
inputting the second detection input data to a second interference detection model which has been trained, and outputting the interference detection result through the second interference detection model (Guarin, FIG.6, [0044]: Input signal to the second interference detector 648 and output the detected interference count of a second signal).
Guarin-Wei-Bala does not explicitly teach
extracting diagonal elements from a covariance matrix comprised in the second signal data to obtain third signal data.
However, Sun teaches
extracting diagonal elements from a covariance matrix comprised in the second signal data to obtain third signal data (Sun, c1: calculating the sum of the diagonal elements of the interference signal spatial covariance matrix obtained. It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to extract diagonal elements from a covariance matrix).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “diagonal elements of a covariance matrix” as taught by Sun in a “multiple stages of the interference detection process” of Guarin-Wei-Bala, so that it would input diagonal elements of a covariance matrix in the signal data to a multiple stages of the interference detection system (Sun, c1).
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Sandberg et al., US 2015/0124632 A1, Method For Providing Estimate Of Interference And Noise Power In E.g. Radio Base Station, Involves Calculating Estimate Based On Calculated Interference And Noise Covariance Matrix, Number Of Antenna Elements And Channel Covariance Matrix.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHHIAN (AMY) LING whose telephone number is (571)270-1074. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 ET.
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, MOO JEONG can be reached at (571)272-9617. 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.
/C.L./
Examiner
Art Unit 2418
/WUTCHUNG CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2418
Prosecution Insights