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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: see Remarks page 9, Applicant argued that ¶ [0029] discloses a controller device may be disaggregated from the access point device, to particularly point out rejected limitation as “receiving, by the processor, from a controller device, an indication determined by the controller device based on an analysis of the detected similarities; and based on the indication, grouping, by the processor, a selected subset of the respective antenna amplifiers into a group usable to transmit first signals simultaneously, or substantially simultaneously”,
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) is not only about the Specification does not disclose the “controller device”. However, the rejection was made because the combination of every claimed limitation such as the controller device receives the indication based on the analysis of the detected similarities. Simply pointing out a controller device as the access point device would not overcome the rejection because other limitation of the controller device is not disclosed. Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) of claim 1 and 8 is maintained.
Currently amendment of claim 15 has overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “receiving, by the processor, from a controller device, an indication determined by the controller device based on an analysis of the detected similarities; and based on the indication, grouping, by the processor, a selected subset of the respective antenna amplifiers into a group usable to transmit first signals simultaneously, or substantially simultaneously” is rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement. In ¶ [0040] of the Specification, a similar non-linearity of power amplifiers is determined, in which being used to skip the need to computationally determine the DPD coefficients for other power amplifier. Also in ¶ [0045-0046], wherein the Specification discloses the threshold for grouping power amplifiers can be dynamically adjusted depending on various conditions. Further more in FIG. 6 and ¶ [0051-0052], the Specification discloses a grouping component 606 that groups the power amplifier based on their degrees of similarity. However, there is no further recitation in the Specification that discloses the rejected limitation as receiving an indication determined by the controller device based on an analysis of the detected similarities and based on that indication, grouping a selected subset of the respective antenna amplifiers into a group usable for transmit first signals simultaneously or substantially simultaneously. The Specification is insufficient for one of ordinary skilled in the art to understand the claimed limitation being performed. Therefore claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Claims 2-7 are rejected under the same scope as being dependent in the rejected independent claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected on the same ground as for claim 1 because of similar scope. Claims 9-14 are rejected under the same scope as being dependent in the rejected independent claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-17 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 15:
Claim 15 is drawn to A non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor of amplifying array controller equipment, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: determining similarities of amplifier devices among a plurality of amplifier devices; and based on the similarities and an interference measurement, selecting, from the plurality of amplifier devices, a transmission group of amplifier devices usable to transmit signals concurrently with a selected interference level. Closest prior art, Hachiya et al. US 2016/0278028, discloses A non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor of amplifying array controller equipment, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: storing characteristics information of power amplifiers; grouping the gain of the power amplifier based on the characteristics information. However, prior art of record fails to disclose either alone or in combination the details of selecting, from the plurality of amplifier devices, a transmission group of amplifier devices usable to transmit signals concurrently with a selected interference level, as claimed in claim 15, in combination with each and every other limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 16-17:
Claims 16-17 are allowed as being dependent on claim 15.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JANICE N TIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-1888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Sam Ahn can be reached at (571) 272-3044. 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.
/JANICE N TIEU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights