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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/26/2024, 03/19/2025, 06/18/2025, 11/04/2025, 02/19/2026 and 07/01/2026 in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-12, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heath et al. (US 9,941,959 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Heath et al. (figures 5B and 15A-C) disclose a method, comprising: detecting an interference signal in two or more signals received via elements of an antenna system (antennas 10), the interference signal originating from an object generating a passive intermodulation (PIM) (column 43, line 45 – column 50, line 22); comparing the two or more signals, to obtain a comparison result (column 47, line 14 – column 48, line 9; and column 50, lines 25-63); and estimating a physical shape of an object generating the PIM according to the comparison result (column 50, line 64 – column 51, line 35).
Regarding claim 2, Heath et al. disclose wherein the estimating the physical shape of the object generating the PIM further comprises: determining an aspect ratio of the object generating the PIM (column 49, line 4 – column 50, line 23; and column 67, line 9 – column 70, line 52).
Regarding claim 5, Heath et al. disclose wherein the antenna system comprises an antenna array that is associated with a base station (column 14, lines 55-67).
Regarding claim 6, Heath et al. disclose wherein the antenna system comprises a plurality of antenna arrays that are associated with a plurality of base stations (column 25, line 57 – column 26, line 14).
Regarding claim 7, Heath et al. disclose wherein the interference signal is generated by mixing of one or more signals transmitted via the antenna system (column 49, line 23 – column 50, line 22).
Regarding claim 8, Heath et al. disclose wherein the interference signal results from illumination of the PIM source by one or more radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by the antenna system (column 50, lines 4-22).
Regarding claim 9, Heath et al. disclose wherein the interference signal results from illumination of the PIM source by one or more radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by a different antenna system (column 25, line 57 – column 26, line 14; and column 50, lines 4-22).
Regarding claim 10, Heath et al. disclose wherein the method is implemented in a Common Public Radio Interface (CPRI) device, a baseband unit (BBU), a remote radio head (RRH) or remote radio unit (RRU), an RRH with integrated antenna, another device in a radio access network (RAN), or a combination thereof (column 9, lines 29-46).
Regarding claim 11, Heath et al. disclose wherein the antenna system comprises a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna or a massive MIMO antenna (column 48, lines 10-18).
Regarding claim 19, Heath et al. (figures 5B-C and 15A-C) disclose a device, comprising: a processing system including a processor (central computer 58); and a memory (mass storage 40) that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: detecting a passive intermodulation (PIM) signal in two or more signals received via an antenna system (column 43, line 45 – column 50, line 22); determining a polarization of the PIM signal, by comparing the two or more signals, to estimate a shape of a corresponding PIM source (column 47, line 14 – column 48, line 9; and column 50, lines 25-63); and generating information regarding the shape to facilitate locating of the PIM source (column 50, line 64 – column 51, line 35).
Regarding claim 12, Heath et al. (figures 5B and 15A-C) disclose a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor (central computer 58), facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: causing an antenna system to transmit a plurality of radio frequency (RF) signals (column 43, line 45 – column 44, line 21; column 49, line 5 - column 50, line 47); based on transmission of the plurality of RF signals, measuring an interference signal that is generated by a passive intermodulation (PIM) source (column 47, line 14 – column 48, line 9; and column 50, lines 25-63); and generating information regarding a physical shape of the PIM source (column 50, line 64 – column 51, line 35).
Regarding claim 16, Heath et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. In addition, Heath et al. disclose wherein the information identifies an aspect ratio of the PIM source (column 49, line 4 – column 50, line 23; and column 67, line 9 – column 70, line 52).
Regarding claim 17, Heath et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. In addition, Heath et al. disclose wherein the processing system is implemented in a Common Public Radio Interface (CPRI) device, a baseband unit (BBU), a remote radio head (RRH) or remote radio unit (RRU), an RRH with integrated antenna, another device in a radio access network (RAN), or a combination thereof (column 9, lines 29-46).
Regarding claim 19, Heath et al. (figures 5B-C and 15A-C) disclose a device, comprising: a processing system including a processor (central computer 58); and a memory (mass storage 40) that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: receiving a passive intermodulation (PIM) signal in two or more signals received via an antenna system (column 43, line 45 – column 50, line 22); determining a polarization of the PIM signal, by comparing the two or more RF signals, to obtain a comparison result (column 47, line 14 – column 48, line 9; and column 50, lines 25-63); and estimating a physical shape of a corresponding PIM source based on the comparison result (column 50, line 64 – column 51, line 35).
Regarding claim 20, Heath et al. disclose wherein the information identifies an aspect ratio of the PIM source (column 49, line 4 – column 50, line 23; and column 67, line 9 – column 70, line 52).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heath et al. in view of Viswanathan (US 2016/0233944 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Heath et al. disclose the method of claim 2 above. In addition, Heath et al. disclose illuminating the object generating the PIM via the transmit signal, wherein the comparison result is based on the transmit signal (column 50, lines 25-63). Heath et al. do not explicitly disclose rotating a polarization of a transmit signal to obtain a rotated transmit signal. However, Viswanathan discloses rotating a polarization of a transmit signal to obtain a rotated transmit signal (paragraphs [0009], [0010], and [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of rotating a polarization of a transmit signal of Viswanathan to the operation of Heath et al. to get a better quality received signal.
Regarding claim 4, Heath et al. and Viswanathan disclose the method of claim 3 above. In addition, Heath et al. disclose performing a comparison of the two or more signals received by the orthogonally-polarized elements with two or more other signals received by the additional orthogonally-polarized elements; and estimating a location of the PIM source based on the comparison (column 48, lines 10-18; and column 49, line 4 – column 50, line 23).
Regarding claim 13, Heath et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. Heath et al. do not explicitly disclose wherein the causing involves adjusting a polarization angle of the plurality of RF signals to be transmitted so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal. However, Viswanathan teaches adjusting a polarization angle of the plurality of RF signals to be transmitted so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal (paragraphs [0009], [0010], and [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of adjusting a polarization angle of the plurality of RF signals of Viswanathan to the operation of Heath et al. to get a better quality received signal.
Claim(s) 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heath et al. in view of Bisiules et al. (US 10,530,440 B2).
Regarding claim 14, Heath et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. Heath et al. do not explicitly disclose wherein the causing involves substantially simultaneous transmission of the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal. However, Bisiules et al. disclose substantially simultaneous transmission of the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal (column 17, lines 10-33; and column 22, lines 17-33). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of substantially simultaneous transmission of the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles of Bisiules et al. to the causing operation of Heath et al. for gathering richer target data.
Regarding claim 18, Heath et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. Heath et al. do not explicitly disclose wherein the causing involves beamforming for the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles. However, Bisiules et al. disclose beamforming for the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles (column 25, line 64 – column 26, line 16; and column 26, line 62 – column 27, line 27). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of beamforming for the plurality of RF signals at the different polarization angles of Bisiules et al. to the causing operation of Heath et al. for improving signal strength and extending range.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heath et al. in view of Bisiules et al. and further in view of Viswanathan.
Regarding claim 15, Heath et al. and Bisiules et al. disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 12 above. Heath et al. and Bisiules et al. do not explicitly disclose wherein the causing involves injecting, into one or more base station downlink (DL) data streams, particular data that corresponds to adjustments of the plurality RF signals to the different polarization angles. However, Viswanathan teaches injecting into one or more base station downlink (DL) data streams, particular data that corresponds to adjustments of the plurality of RF signals to the different polarization angles (paragraphs [0009], [0010], and [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the teaching of adjustments of the polarization angle of the plurality of RF signals of Viswanathan to the operation of Heath et al. and Bisiules et al. to get a better quality received signal.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of pending application are either anticipated or being obvious over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522.
Regarding claim 1 of the pending application, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a method, comprising: detecting an interference signal in two or more signals received via elements of an antenna system, the interference signal originating from an object generating passive intermodulation (PIM); comparing the two or more signals, to obtain a comparison result; and estimating a physical shape of an object generating the PIM according to the comparison result.
Regarding claim 2 of the pending application, claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the estimating the physical shape of the object generating the PIM further comprises: determining an aspect ratio of the object generating the PIM.
Regarding claim 3 of the pending application, claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including rotating a polarization of a transmit signal to obtain a rotated transmit signal; and illuminating the object generating the PIM via the rotated transmit signal, wherein the comparison result is based on the rotated transmit signal.
Regarding claim 4 of the pending application, claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the antenna system comprises polarized elements, further comprising: performing a comparison of the two or more signals received by the polarized elements; and estimating a location of the object generating PIM based on the comparison.
Regarding claim 5 of the pending application, claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the antenna system comprises an antenna array that is associated with a base station.
Regarding claim 6 of the pending application, claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the antenna system comprises a plurality of antenna arrays that are associated with a plurality of base stations.
Regarding claim 7 of the pending application, claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the interference signal is generated by mixing of one or more signals transmitted via the antenna system.
Regarding claim 8 of the pending application, claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the interference signal results from illumination of the object generating PIM by one or more radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by the antenna system.
Regarding claim 9 of the pending application, claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the interference signal results from illumination of the object generating PIM by one or more radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by a different antenna system.
Regarding claim 10 of the pending application, claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the method is implemented in a Common Public Radio Interface (CPRI) device, a baseband unit (BBU), a remote radio head (RRH) or remote radio unit (RRU), an RRH with integrated antenna, another device in a radio access network (RAN), or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 11 of the pending application, claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the antenna system comprises a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna or a massive MIMO antenna.
Regarding claim 12 of the pending application, claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: causing an antenna system to transmit a plurality of radio frequency (RF) signals; based on transmission of the plurality of RF signals, measuring an interference signal that is generated by a passive intermodulation (PIM) source; and generating information regarding a physical shape of the PIM source.
Regarding claim 13 of the pending application, claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the causing involves adjusting a polarization angle of the plurality of RF signals to be transmitted so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal.
Regarding claim 14 of the pending application, claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the causing involves substantially simultaneous transmission of the plurality of RF signals at different polarization angles so as to facilitate identification of a polarization of the interference signal.
Regarding claim 15 of the pending application, claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the causing involves injecting, into one or more base station downlink (DL) data streams, particular data that corresponds to adjustments of the plurality of RF signals to the different polarization angles.
Regarding claim 16 of the pending application, claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the information identifies an aspect ratio of the PIM source.
Regarding claim 17 of the pending application, claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the processing system is implemented in a Common Public Radio Interface (CPRI) device, a baseband unit (BBU), a remote radio head (RRH) or remote radio unit (RRU), an RRH with integrated antenna, another device in a radio access network (RAN), or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 18 of the pending application, claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the causing involves beamforming for the plurality of RF signals at different polarization angles.
Regarding claim 19 of the pending application, claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a device, comprising: a processing system including a processor; and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising: receiving a passive intermodulation (PIM) signal in two or more radio frequency (RF) signals; comparing the two or more RF signals, to obtain a comparison result ; and estimating a physical shape of a corresponding PIM source based on the comparison result.
Regarding claim 20 of the pending application, claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,522 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the operations further comprise: determining an aspect ratio of the PIM source based on the comparison result, wherein the estimating the physical shape is according to the aspect ratio.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vella-Coleiro et al. (US 2021/0099239 A1) disclose an apparatus has an ability to measure the distance to the PIM source located at or within the device under test with acceptable resolution, in the presence of a second PIM source located at the test apparatus, using a bandwidth which is sufficiently narrow to be compatible with the device under test, and without requiring sophisticated or expensive test apparatus.
Bradley (US 10,637,567 B1) teaches a measuring instrument for detecting a source of passive intermodulation (PIM) includes a first signal source, a second source and a receiver; the first and second signal sources are each connected with separate transmit antenna to transmit a first and second signal, respectively; the first transmit antenna and the second transmit antenna are arranged in a fixed relationship relative to each other such that the first signal and the second signal are combinable to generate a PIM signal at a PIM; the receiver is connected with a receive antenna and arranged in a fixed relationship relative to the first transmit antenna and the second transmit antenna to receive the PIM signal reradiated from the PIM source; the receiver is configured to receive the PIM signal and indicate detection of the PIM source in response to receiving the PIM signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUOCHIEN B VUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7902. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-06:00PM M-F.
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, ANTHONY ADDY can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUOCHIEN B VUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights