DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to application filed on 24 October 2024. Claims 1-20 are now pending in the present application. This office action is made Non-Final
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on
08 September 2025
05 June 2025
are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is being considered by the examiner.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,206,490 B2 (Hinman et al; application no. 18/528,595; Applicant Admitted Art; hereinafter AAA ‘490). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant application and the US patent AAA ‘490 claim the same subject matter. The common subject matter is systems and methods of communication synchronization between two or more radios.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, AA ‘490 discloses a system, comprising: two or more radios collocated with one another, the two or more radios communicating with two far radios over a pair of long range wireless links, the two or more radios being configured to transmit and receive in synchronization with one another on a same channel, wherein an off-axis response for each of the two or more radios is reduced compared to their on-axis response for improved signal to noise ratio, the on-axis response of the two or more radios being substantially equal to one another; and a cloud controller configured to: monitor interference by determining the two or more radios are not operating in synchronization with each other; select a shared channel for the two or more radios; selectively control the two or more radios to broadcast on the shared channel over a network; synchronize transmit and receive time periods of the two or more radios such that the two or more radios transmit at a same time and receive at the same time as one another on the shared channel; and balance an on-axis response for each of the two or more radios such that they are approximately equivalent to one another wherein the on-axis response for a radio occurs along a main axis between the two or more radios and the two far radios { (drawn to features - see claims 1 and 15, respectively) }.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 1 and 15.
Regarding claim 3, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 1 and 15.
Regarding claims 4 and 15, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 12.
Regarding claim 6, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 12.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 1 and 15.
Regarding claim 9, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 8 and 9.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 13 and 19.
Regarding claims 11 and 14, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 14 and 20.
Regarding claim 16, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 4 and 17.
Regarding claim 17, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 1 and 15.
Regarding claim 19, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘490 claims 1 and 15.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,888,589 B2 (Hinman et al; application no. 16/591,589; Applicant Admitted Art; hereinafter AAA ‘589). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant application and the US patent AAA ‘589 claim the same subject matter. The common subject matter is systems and methods of communication synchronization between two or more radios.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, AAA ‘589 discloses a system, comprising: two or more radios collocated with one another, the two or more radios communicating with two far radios over a pair of long range wireless links, the two or more radios being configured to transmit and receive in synchronization with one another on a same channel, wherein an off-axis response for each of the two or more radios is reduced compared to their on-axis response for improved signal to noise ratio, the on-axis response of the two or more radios being substantially equal to one another; and a cloud controller configured to: monitor interference by determining the two or more radios are not operating in synchronization with each other; select a shared channel for the two or more radios; selectively control the two or more radios to broadcast on the shared channel over a network; synchronize transmit and receive time periods of the two or more radios such that the two or more radios transmit at a same time and receive at the same time as one another on the shared channel; and balance an on-axis response for each of the two or more radios such that they are approximately equivalent to one another wherein the on-axis response for a radio occurs along a main axis between the two or more radios and the two far radios { (drawn to features - see claims 1 and 21, respectively (also, see claim 16) }.
Regarding claims 2-11 and 13-20, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘589 claims 2-20 and 22-23.
Therefore, the US patent reference AAA ‘589 includes the same manipulations of the instant application and as addressed above more than adequately meets the claim limitations.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 9,998,246 B2 (Hinman et al; application no. 14/657,942; Applicant Admitted Art; hereinafter AAA ‘246). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the instant application and the US patent AAA ‘246 claim the same subject matter. The common subject matter is systems and methods of communication synchronization between two or more radios.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, AAA ‘246 discloses a system, comprising: two or more radios collocated with one another, the two or more radios communicating with two far radios over a pair of long range wireless links, the two or more radios being configured to transmit and receive in synchronization with one another on a same channel, wherein an off-axis response for each of the two or more radios is reduced compared to their on-axis response for improved signal to noise ratio, the on-axis response of the two or more radios being substantially equal to one another; and a cloud controller configured to: monitor interference by determining the two or more radios are not operating in synchronization with each other; select a shared channel for the two or more radios; selectively control the two or more radios to broadcast on the shared channel over a network; synchronize transmit and receive time periods of the two or more radios such that the two or more radios transmit at a same time and receive at the same time as one another on the shared channel; and balance an on-axis response for each of the two or more radios such that they are approximately equivalent to one another wherein the on-axis response for a radio occurs along a main axis between the two or more radios and the two far radios { (drawn to features - see claims 1 and 13 (& claim 17), respectively) }.
Regarding claims 2-12, 14-16, and 18-20, are drawn to the features of AAA ‘246 claims 2-20 and 22-23.
Therefore, the US patent reference AAA ‘246 includes the same manipulations of the instant application and as addressed above more than adequately meets the claim limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIE J DANIEL JR whose telephone number is (571)272-7907. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 - 6.
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, Gary Mui can be reached on 571-270-1420. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIE J DANIEL JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
WJD,Jr
30 September 2026
