DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on November 13, 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
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 .
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, 4-6, 10-12, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal et al (US 2018/0324742 Al) (hereinafter “Agarwal”), in view of Katzav et al (US 2025/0008374 Al) (hereinafter “Katzav”), in view of Palermo et al (US 2023/0109635 Al) (hereinafter “Palermo”) and in further view of Somashekar et al (US 2024/0406754 Al) (hereinafter “Somashekar”).
Regarding claim 1, Agarwal teaches:
A method for detecting and mitigating interference of a satellite signal by one or more cell signals, comprising:
receiving cell information (Agarwal, [0006] wherein a base station has a sniffing circuit a.k.a dummy UE [0034] and [0047] wherein the sniffing circuit may be configured to determine basic cell information ...), the cell information comprising an interference level (Agarwal, [0070] wherein the sniffer application may communicate to the processor for reporting of the detected interference and interferers ...) experienced by a cell signal sharing a frequency spectrum with a satellite signal, a Physical Cell Identity (PCI) of the cell signal (Agarwal, [0007] wherein the sniffer circuit may be configured to determine PCI …), and a Reference Signal Receive Power (RSRP) (Agarwal, [0044] wherein the dummy UE may obtain RSRP …) of the cell signal;
monitoring the interference level and the RSRP (Agarwal, FIG.6 boxes 601 and 607; [0008] wherein the output of the sniffer circuit may be coupled to a self-organizing network (SON) module, enabling the SON module to determine current and maximum potential power of adjacent cells and coordinate power budgets and hence coverage and capacity with neighbor cells; [0027] wherein the coordinating server may dynamically configure cell power level to mitigate interference; [0044] wherein once a PCI information is obtained, RSRP to measure cell-specific signal strength metric may also be obtained; [0070] wherein the sniffer application may report the detected interference and interferers to the coordinating server).
Agarwal fails to teach that the cell information is received, from pods disposed in an exclusive zone or respective pod of the pods provide cell information;
determining a Physical Resource Block (PRB) blanking level for each cell information received based on the interference level and the RSRP; and
blanking a PRB of the PCI per the PRB blanking level wherein the PRB blanking level indicates at least one of a complete blanking, a partial blanking, or no blanking.
Katzav teaches the container concept (Katzav, [0080] wherein a container image is a
ready-to-run software package, containing everything needed to run an application: the code and any runtime it requires, application and system libraries, and default values for any essential settings.) and the pod concept (Katzav, [0124] wherein a pod is a group of one or more containers, with shared storage and network resources, and a specification for how to run the containers).
Since a container is a lightweight software package that does not include an operating system, it is faster to deploy and redeploy a pod of containers than a virtual machine or a physical server. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to implement the sniffer application in Agarwal’s teaching using the pod concept in Katzav’s teaching to deploy cell sniffing pods near some terrestrial cells initially and redeploy them in different locations as quickly as possible to sniff different terrestrial cells.
Agarwal as improved by Katzav, does not explicitly teach but Palermo teaches an exclusion zone (Palermo, FIG.2B; [0042] wherein 161 is an exclusion zone). An exclusion zone is the geographic area around an earth station where the link between a satellite and the earth station has priority over terrestrial cells and interference caused by the terrestrial cells should be mitigated.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to deploy cell sniffing pods in an exclusion zone to measure and mitigate the interference caused by the specific terrestrial cells in the exclusion zone to the earth station.
Agarwal as improved by Katzav and Palermo, does not explicitly teach but Somashekar teaches:
determining a Physical Resource Block (PRB) blanking level for each cell information received based on the interference level (Somashekar, [0103] wherein a degradation indicator is based on interference) and
blanking a PRB per the PRB blanking level (Somashekar, [0103] wherein a degradation indicator can indicate and/or specify that the noise measurement is determined to be less than, meet, or exceed a particular threshold or threshold value for noise.), wherein the PRB blanking level indicates at least one of a complete blanking, a partial blanking, or no blanking (Somashekar, [0104] wherein for example, the server may determine that when the value for the signal quality of the uplink channel between the user device and the satellite meets or exceeds 20 dB, no further action is needed as the signal quality is sufficient).
Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, does not explicitly teach that an interference threshold and an RSRP threshold are associated with a PCI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to combine the coordination server (Agarwal, FIG.6 server 601) and the SON module (Agarwal, FIG. 6 SON module 607) with the 102 server (Somashekar, FIG. 2, server 102) and connect the combined server to the database 120 (Somashekar, FIG. 2, database 120). The cell sniffing pods in an exclusion zone would send PCIs, PCIs’ RSRP levels, and PCIs’ interference levels to the combined server. The database 120 would be improved to store PCIs, PCIs’ interference thresholds and PCIs’ RSRP thresholds. The combined server would be improved to compare a PCI’s interference level with its interference threshold and the PCI’s RSRP level with its RSRP threshold to make an appropriate blanking decision (e.g., no blanking if the sniffed RSRP is less than the RSRP threshold and the sniffed interference level is less than the interference threshold, full blanking if the sniffed RSRP is greater than the RSRP threshold and the sniffed interference level is greater than the interference threshold) before sending a blanking command to the interfering terrestrial cell (Agarwal, FIG.6 wherein the SON module uses NETCONF to update a terrestrial cell). Blanking a specific interfering terrestrial cell using an appropriate blanking level would lessen the interference mitigation impact on the terrestrial RAN.
Regarding claim 2, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the receiving comprises receiving feeds from the pods, wherein each of the feeds comprises current cell information detected by one of the pods (Agarwal [0007] wherein the sniffer circuit may be configured to determine typical basic cell information such as PLMN ID, PSC, PCI, ECGI ...; [0008] wherein the output of the sniffer circuit may be coupled to a self-organizing network (SON) module, enabling the SON module to maintain a neighbor list, determine current and maximum potential power of adjacent cells and coordinate power budgets and hence coverage and capacity with neighbor cells).
The teaching of Agarwal is combined with Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar under the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the receiving comprises decoding the cell signal to obtain the cell information (Agarwal, [0007] wherein the sniffer circuit may be configured to determine typical basic cell information such as PLMN ID, PSC, PCI, ECGI …).
The teaching of Agarwal is combined with Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar under the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the determining comprises
associating, based on a location of a respective pod (Agarwal, [0008] wherein the measurements provided by the sniffer circuit may be stored together with a positioning coordinate, such as GPS, in a database. The database may be located at a coordinating server.) of the pods detecting the cell signal,
Agarwal does not explicitly teach but Somashekhar teaches:
a threshold RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated. Path loss is a power measurement that is directly related to RSRP. Lower path loss results in a higher RSRP.) and a threshold interference level (Somashekar, FIG.4, box 404, FIG.2 step 202, and [0103] wherein the degradation indicator can specify a value (e.g., numerical) for the noise and/or other interference.),
comparing the threshold RSRP to the RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated.)
comparing the threshold interference level to the interference level (Somashekhar, [0103] wherein the degradation indicator can indicate and/or specify that the noise measurement is determined to be less than, meet, or exceed a particular threshold or threshold value for noise.)
Agarwal as improved by Somashekhar, does not explicitly teach that the RSRP and interference thresholds are associated with a PCI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to combine the coordination server (Agarwal, FIG.6 server 601) and the SON module (Agarwal, FIG. 6 SON module 607) with the 102 server (Somashekar, FIG. 2, server 102) and connect the combined server the database 120 (Somashekar, FIG. 2, database 120). The database 120 would be improved to store the GPS locations of the cell sniffing pods in Agarwal’s teaching, the PCIs of the terrestrial cells sniffed by the pods, the PCIs’ interference thresholds and the PCIs’ RSRP thresholds. The combined server would compare a PCI’s interference level with its interference threshold and the PCI’s RSRP level with its RSRP threshold to make an appropriate blanking decision (full, partial, no blanking) to lessen the interference mitigation impact to the terrestrial RAN based on the location of the pod detecting the cell signal.
Regarding claim 6, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1.
Agarwal does not explicitly teach but Somashekhar teaches that the determining comprises
a threshold RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated. Path loss is a power measurement that is directly related to RSRP. Lower path loss results in a higher RSRP.) and a threshold interference level (Somashekar, FIG.4, box 404, FIG.2 step 202, and [0103] wherein the degradation indicator can specify a value (e.g., numerical) for the noise and/or other interference.),
comparing the threshold RSRP to the RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated.)
comparing the threshold interference level to the interference level (Somashekhar, [0103] wherein the degradation indicator can indicate and/or specify that the noise measurement is determined to be less than, meet, or exceed a particular threshold or threshold value for noise.)
Agarwal as improved by Somashekhar, does not explicitly teach:
associating based on a location of a satellite communicating via the satellite signal, a threshold RSRP and a threshold interference level for a respective PCI in the cell information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to combine the coordination server (Agarwal, FIG.6 server 601) and the SON module (Agarwal, FIG. 6 SON module 607) with the 102 server (Somashekar, FIG. 2, server 102) and connect the combined server to the database 120 (Somashekar, FIG. 2, database 120). The database 120 already maps dates and times to geographic surface areas (Somashekhar, [0106] wherein a trajectory path includes a plurality of geographic surface areas or locations, which can correspond to coverage areas of that satellite, as well as the dates and times at which the satellite's overhead travel above the Earth corresponds to those particular geographic surface areas … Based on a particular combination of date and time, the database 120 stores the geographic surface area for which the satellite 114 can provide communications coverage to user device(s) that is/are located within or at the edge of said geographic surface area on that date and at that time.). The database 120 would be improved to associate a geographic surface area with the PCIs of the terrestrial cells, the PCIs’ interference thresholds and the PCIs’ RSRP thresholds. The combined server would compare a PCI’s interference level with its interference threshold and the PCI’s RSRP level with its RSRP threshold to make an appropriate blanking decision (full, partial, no blanking) to lessen the interference mitigation impact to the terrestrial RAN based on the location of the satellite.
Regarding claim 10, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1.
Agarwal does not explicitly teach but Somashekhar teaches:
a threshold RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated. Path loss is a power measurement that is directly related to RSRP. Lower path loss results in a higher RSRP.)
comparing the threshold RSRP to the RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated.)
the PRB blanking level indicates the no blanking (Somashekar, [0104] wherein for example, the server may determine that when the value for the signal quality of the uplink channel between the user device and the satellite meets or exceeds 20 dB, no further action is needed as the signal quality is sufficient).
Agarwal as improved by Somashekhar, does not explicitly teach:
the PRB blanking level indicates the no blanking when the RSRP is below a threshold RSRP to avoid unnecessary PRB blanking
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to combine the coordination server (Agarwal, FIG.6 server 601) and the SON module (Agarwal, FIG. 6 SON module 607) with the 102 server (Somashekar, FIG. 2, server 102) and connect the combined server to the database 120 (Somashekar, FIG. 2, database 120). The cell sniffing pods in an exclusion zone would send PCIs and PCIs’ RSRP levels to the combined server. The database 120 would be improved to store PCIs and PCIs’ RSRP thresholds. The combined server would be improved to compare a PCI’s RSRP level with its RSRP threshold to make a No Blanking decision if the sniffed RSRP value is below the RSRP threshold because even a partial PRB blanking when a signal is weak will lead to dropped calls, failed handovers, and Radio Resource Control (RRC) disconnections.
Regarding claim 11, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches
A system to detect and mitigate interference of a satellite signal by one or more cell signals, comprising:
one or more processors (Agarwal, FIG.2, Sniffer Circuit (Baseband Processor)); and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Agarwal, [0092] wherein software executables may be stored on a computer memory storage device, a hard disk, a flash drive) coupled to the one or more processors (Agarwal, FIG.2 Processor 201) and storing programming instructions for execution by the one or more processors, the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 1 (see mapping to claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 2 (see mapping to claim 2).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is a duplicate of claim 4 (see mapping to claim 4).
Regarding claim 15, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 5 (see mapping to claim 5).
Regarding claim 16, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 6 (see mapping to claim 6).
Regarding claim 20, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 10 (see mapping to claim 10).
Claim 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal, in view of Katzav, in view of Palermo, in view of Somashekar and in further view of Weiss et al (Enforcement and Spectrum Sharing: A Case Study of the 1695-1710 MHz Band IEEE publication (hereinafter “Weiss”).
Regarding claim 3, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1 including an exclusion zone but does not explicitly teach that the exclusion zone is created for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) earth station.
Weiss discloses an exclusion zone for NOAA (Weiss, page 1 section 2A wherein there are 18 earth station locations that are critical to NOAA operations that are to be protected in the NTIA spectrum sharing framework; page 2 section 4A wherein NTIA proposes exclusion zones with a radius in the 72 – 121 km range).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to substitute the exclusion zone in claim 1 with the exclusion zone created for a NOAA earth station where the signal between a NOAA satellite and a NOAA earth station has higher priority than the terrestrial signal.
Regarding claim 13, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, discloses the system of claim 11, wherein the exclusion zone is created for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) earth station in claim 3 (see mapping to claim 3) for an exclusion time period (Weiss, page 10, section IV A wherein if no interference occurs over some time period, the exclusion zone can be shrunk).
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal, in view of Katzav, in view of Palermo, in view of Somashekar and in further view of Ougang et al (US 2019/0373495 Al) (hereinafter “Ougang”).
Regarding claim 7, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the determining comprises
comparing the threshold RSRP to the RSRP (Somashekhar, [0118] wherein the one or more processors may measure the uplink signal quality based on a path loss measurement. When the uplink quality for the uplink channel is determined to be below a threshold, a degradation indicator is generated.)
comparing the threshold interference level to the interference level (Somashekhar, [0103] wherein the degradation indicator can indicate and/or specify that the noise measurement is determined to be less than, meet, or exceed a particular threshold or threshold value for noise.)
Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, and Somashekar, does not explicitly teach but Ougang teaches:
inferring with an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML) module (Ougang, [0011] wherein the AI & ML assisted SON platform may receive cell property data associated with a cell in a mobile network and performance data associated with the cell.), a threshold RSRP (Ougang, [0027] wherein the AI & ML assisted platform may determine whether the performance data associated with a Cell 1 satisfies a coverage threshold and/or an interference threshold. WCT is the weak coverage threshold, and RSRPi (x) is a RSRP measurement at location x.) and a threshold interference level (Ougang, [0029] wherein the interference threshold may be associated with over coverage or interference in Cell 1) for a respective PCI in the cell information (Ougang, [0027] wherein Cell 1 is associated with a PCI)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective date of the application to:
Combine the AI/ML assisted SON platform in Ougang’s teaching with the SON module (Agarwal, FIG.6 module 607) and
Combine the coordination server (Agarwal, FIG.6 server 601) with server 102 (Somashekar, FIG. 2 server 102) and connect the combined server to the satellite location database (Somashekar, FIG. 2, database 120)
to infer RSRP and interference thresholds based on satellite locations, PCIs, RSRP levels, and interference levels to improve PRB blanking decisions.
Regarding claim 17, Agarwal as improved by Katzav, Palermo, Somashekar, and Ougang, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the programming instructions instructing the one or more processors to perform the operations in claim 7 (see mapping to claim 7).
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sohi G, Dynamic Assignment of Network Resources to Resource Pools in Pods, (U.S. Pub No. US 2025/0261044 Al). U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Visotsky E, Beam Management for Interference Mitigation for Wireless Networks, (U.S. Pub No. US 2018/0098289 Al). U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3195. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am - 5 pm.
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, KEVIN T BATES can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/STEVEN DUONG NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights