DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 14/241,130, filed on February 26, 2014.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0001], lines 2-3, Applicant is suggested to update the U.S. Application Number 18/130,493, now U.S. Patent No. 12,149,307.
Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lehtinen et al. (US 6,449,264 B1), hereinafter “Lehtinen” in view of Gormley (US 2010/0216452 A), hereinafter “Gormley”.
Lehtinen illustrates a communications system in Figure 7 comprising a mobile phone (500) for communications with a first base station (GSM 514) and a second base station (DCS 515), wherein the mobile phone (500) includes at least a memory (510), a microprocessor (507), an encoder (508), a decoder (505), and a transceiver (400 or 450) shown in Figures 4 and 5. The detailed discussion of the communications system of Figure 7 is described from column 12, line 57 to column 13, line 40.
Regarding claim 2, as shown in Figure 7 and Figure 4 or Figure 5, a mobile terminal (the communications system of Figure 7) comprising: a wireless communication circuit (transceiver 400 or 450); and a processor (microprocessor 507) configured to control the wireless communication circuit to perform a predetermined communication mode (transmission mode and/or reception mode), wherein in the predetermined communication mode, the wireless communication circuit receives first data and second data from a first base station (GSM 514) and a second base station (DCS 515) in a first frequency band and a second frequency band, respectively, at an identical time,
Power control is a fundamental aspect of wireless communication, particularly in systems where multiple users share the same frequency (like CDMA). Its purpose includes managing interference levels, ensuring that all signals arrive at the base station with approximately the same required power level, and normalizing transmission energy to maintain link quality without wasting power or interfering with other cells.
Although Lehtinen teaches that it is obvious for one skilled in the art that the described embodiments of the invention are exemplary, and that they are in no way intended to limit the invention or the scope defined by the enclosed claims. Although the operation of a mobile phone of the invention has above been described only in connection with the GSM and DCS systems, the invention is also applicable to other kinds of radio transceivers with two radio systems. The prerequisite is that the frequencies used by the different radio systems differ from each other sufficiently so that the first down-mixing frequency of the receiver and the last up-mixing frequency of the transmitter may, in operation according to another system, be generated with a simple operation from those frequencies which are used as the first down-mixing frequency of the receiver and the last up-mixing frequency of the transmitter in the operation in accordance with the first system. The invention does not require the two frequency bands in the description expressly be frequency bands of two different data transmission systems, but the invention is also adapted for use in such a single system (for example, UMTS system; Universal Mobile Telecommunications System) in which there are several frequency bands for reception and transmission. The invention is also suited for such a system in which reception and transmission are carried out in accordance with TDD (Time Division Duplex) in the same frequency band without a duplex interval (col. 13, line 56 to col. 14, line 14).
Lehtinen fails to show or teach that the transceiver (400 or 450) receives the first data being identical to the second data, and the first frequency band being identical to the second frequency band from the first base station (GSM 514) and the second base station (DCS 515).
It appears this is a known and widely used set of techniques in modern wireless communication systems, such as 4G and 5G cellular networks and Wi-Fi. The ability of a device to simultaneously receive the same data from multiple sources on different frequencies is specifically implemented for performance, reliability, and efficiency.
The general principle is to use diversity techniques and advanced signal processing to leverage multiple signal paths for better reception.
Gormley also relates to a wireless communication system (118) in Figure 1 comprising: a user equipment (114), a first base station (106), and one or more base stations (108).
Figure 2 illustrates a flowchart for determining a network parameter difference between the two base stations and teaches in at least block (206) that the wireless transceiver of the user equipment (114) receives the network parameter of the second base station. The network parameter received from the second base station is of the same type as the network parameter received from the first base station (inherently applied to the transceiver of the user equipment (114) receives the first data being identical to the second data, and the first frequency band being identical to the second frequency band from the first base station (106) and the second base station (108). Paragraph [0051].
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to implement Lehtinen’s base stations (GSM 514 and DCS 515) with the same type of base stations as taught by Gormley to provide the same first data and second data, and the same first frequency band and second frequency band to the transceiver of the mobile phone (500) in order to simplify network management, ensure consistent performance (signal strength, handover), reduce complexity, and often lower costs due to shared hardware/software.
Regarding claim 1, similar to the apparatus claim 2, as shown in Figure 7, Lehtinen further includes a non-transitory computer readable medium (memory 510) storing a program for the transceiver (400 or 450) of the mobile phone (500), causing the mobile phone to perform the claim features similar to the claim features of claim 2 for the similar reasons described in claim 2 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Varma et al. (US 8,170,618 B2) relates to a multiple-input multiple-output wireless communication system (100) in Figure 1 comprising: a base station (110); a base station (120); and a wireless device 130.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Young T. Tse whose telephone number is (571)272-3051. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:30am-7pm.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/Young T. Tse/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632