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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,126,091. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant invention is merely broader and encompassed by the conflicting patent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, fist clause reciting a second instance of “an antenna array” is indefinite, since it’s unclear whether this limitation is related (or in addition) to “an antenna array” recited in the preamble.
Claim 1, second and third clauses respectively reciting “the antenna array” is indefinite, since it’s unclear which of the two instances of “antenna array” earlier recited is being referred to.
Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending therefrom.
There should be a clear recitation of interrelated structure in order to provide a complete and operable method for suppressing interference signals received by an antenna array.
The following claims, drafted by the examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, is presented to applicant for consideration:
1. (Currently Amended) A method for suppressing a plurality of interference signals received by an antenna array that concurrently receives a desired signal, the method comprising:
receiving N antenna signals from the antenna array comprising N antenna elements, where N is greater than one;
obtaining respective arrival directions of the interference signals upon the antenna array;
applying each of a plurality of nulling beam weight sets to a respective one of N null beam forming networks (null BFNs) of an interferer-nulling beam forming network coupled to the antenna array to generate N null signals, wherein each nulling beam weight set corresponds to a different respective set of (N-1) independent nulls corresponding to (N-1) of the arrival directions, such that within each null signal, (N-1) of the interference signals are suppressed with respect to each of a remaining one of the interference signals and the desired signal;
filtering each of the N null signals using a respective one of N non-linear filters to suppress the respective remaining one of the interference signals with respect to the desired signal, thereby generating N filtered signals;
combining the N filtered signals to generate an output signal corresponding to the desired signal[[.]]; and
wherein said obtaining respective arrival directions comprises:
coupling signal energy from at least one signal path between the antenna array and a signal path containing the output signal to provide at least one coupled signal,
sampling the coupled signal to provide a sequence of samples, and
computing the arrival directions using the sequence of samples.
3. (Canceled)
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IDS document “Wolcott” (US 5579019).
Claim 1: As best understood, Wolcott discloses a method for suppressing a plurality of interference signals received by an antenna array that concurrently receives a desired signal (col. 2, ll. 38-64), the method comprising:
receiving N antenna signals from an antenna array comprising N antenna elements 20 (Fig. 1), where N is greater than one;
obtaining (inherently) respective arrival directions of the interference signals upon the antenna array (col. 2, ll. 38-64);
applying each of a plurality of nulling beam weight sets to a respective one of N null beam forming networks (null BFNs) 26 of an interferer-nulling beam forming network coupled to the antenna array to generate N null signals (col. 3, ll. 47-58), wherein each nulling beam weight set corresponds to a different respective set of (N-1) independent nulls corresponding to (N-1) of the arrival directions (col. 6, ll. 32-46), such that within each null signal, (N-1) of the interference signals are suppressed with respect to each of a remaining one of the interference signals and the desired signal (col. 8, ll. 36-55);
filtering each of the N null signals using a respective one of N non-linear filters to suppress the respective remaining one of the interference signals with respect to the desired signal, thereby generating N filtered signals (col. 4, ll. 9-21).
Wolcott fails to expressly teach combining the N filtered signals to generate an output signal corresponding to the desired signal.
However, Wolcott teaches “The amplitude and phase adjustment by the variable amplitude and phase elements 28 allows each beam forming network 26 the capability to simultaneously and independently form multiple high-gain antenna patterns to cover multiple coverage areas or theaters of interest.” (Col. 4, ll. 30-34)
Wolcott further teaches “Since each output of the first tier of beam forming networks 26 contains signals from multiple coverage areas, legitimate users of the system located in one theater or coverage area could present interference to the nulling processors 16 assigned to other theaters, diluting their power to suppress real jammers or unintentional interferers within their assigned theaters. This potential self-interference is avoided by providing filters in the nulling processor 16 which discriminate against system users which are located outside the theater assigned to that nulling processor 16. One skilled in the art would also recognize that shared signal features or characteristics other than frequency band (such as pseudo-random codes and time slot assignments) could be used to distinguish users in one coverage area from those in other areas.” (Col. 4, ll. 47-61)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design Wolcott’s method for combining the N filtered signals to generate an output signal corresponding to the desired signal, thereby achieving the capability to simultaneously and independently form multiple high-gain antenna patterns to cover multiple coverage areas of interest.
Claim 2: Wolcott discloses the antenna array system of claim 1, wherein said obtaining respective arrival directions comprises receiving the estimated respective arrival directions from an external system 18 (Fig. 1).
Claims 6-14: Wolcott discloses the antenna array system of claim 1, wherein each of the interference signals received by the antenna array has a larger magnitude than the desired signal (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
wherein each of the interference signals received by the antenna array has a magnitude at least ten times that of the desired signal (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
wherein each of the interference signals is a substantially constant envelope signal that overlaps the desired signal in frequency spectrum and in time (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
wherein said non-linearly filtering each of the null signals comprises polar excising each of the null signals (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
wherein the respective one of the N filtered signals from each of the N non-linear filters is not a linear function of the respective one of the N null signals (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
further comprising generating the respective nulling beam weight set for each of the N null BFNs, and generating a desired signal beam weight set for combining the N filtered signals (col. 4, ll. 30-34 and col. 8, ll. 36-55);
wherein each of the interferer nulling beam forming network and the non-linear filters comprise analog circuitry (see Fig. 1 and col. 4, ll. 30-34);
wherein each of the interferer nulling beam forming network and the non-linear filters is a virtual element having respective functions implemented by digital circuitry (col. 4, ll. 30-34);
further comprising operating in a first mode using the plurality of beam weight sets when a number of interference signals is equal to N, and operating in a second mode when the number of interference signals is less than N (col. 4, ll. 30-34 and col. 8, ll. 36-55).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Leabman (US 8923189)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASAN ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1719. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 9AM-7PM 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, DAMEON LEVI can be reached on (571)272-2105. 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.
/HASAN ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845