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 01/09/2025, 04/24/2025 and 10/02/2025 in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “MSIS” in line 15, should be “Mobile Signal Interference Source (MSIS)”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-9 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.
Claims 1-9 recite “determining a first ratio of when a second signal is received from the IoT component while the AGC is saturated” in claim 1, lines 11-12, which render the claims indefinite since it is not clear what a first ratio related to, whether it is related to some received signal strength or not.
Claims 5-8 recite “determining a second ratio of when a transponder for the IoT sensor is active while the AGC is saturated” in claim 5, lines 3-4, which render the claims indefinite since it is not clear what a second ratio related to, whether it is related to some received signal strength or not.
Claim 7 recites “determining whether a third ratio, of when the transponder for the IoT sensor is active and inactive, is less than the second value” in claim 7, lines 2-3, which render the claims indefinite since it is not clear what a third ratio related to, whether it is related to some received signal strength or not.
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 1-5 and 8-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7, 9, 14-16 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-5 and 8-20 are either anticipated or being obvious over claims 1-5, 7, 9, 14-16 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377.
Regarding claim 1 of the pending application, claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a process comprising: receiving, by an Internet-of-Things (IoT) sensor, an interfering signal received from a Signal Interference Source (SIS);wherein the IoT sensor includes an Automatic Gain Controller (AGC);determining whether a combined signal saturates the AGC; wherein the combined signal includes the interfering signal and a second signal received from an IoT component; wherein the IoT component includes at least one of a frequency manager, an IoT frequency controller, and another IoT sensor; when the AGC is saturated: determining a first ratio of when a second signal is received from the IoT component while the AGC is saturated; determining if the first ratio is greater than a first value; and when the first ratio is greater than the first value, remediating the interfering signal by: decreasing an output power of a transponder for the IoT component.
Regarding claim 2 of the pending application, claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein remediating the interfering signal further comprises: moving the IoT sensor to a location further away from the SIS.
Regarding claim 3 of the pending application, claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein remediating the interfering signal further comprises: shielding the IoT sensor from the interfering signal.
Regarding claim 4 of the pending application, claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the first value is seventy-five percent (75%).
Regarding claim 5 of the pending application, claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein when the first ratio is less than the first value, the process further comprising: determining a second ratio of when a transponder for the IoT sensor is active while the AGC is saturated; determining if the second ratio is within a first range bounded by the first value and a second value; wherein the second value is less than the first value; when the second ratio is less than the first value and greater than the second value, determining a non-interfered AGC power level; determining if the non-interfered AGC power level exceeds a maximum AGC power level; and when "Yes," remediating the interfering signal by, at least one of: decreasing an output power of a transponder for the IoT component; moving the IoT sensor to a location further away from the SIS; and shielding the IoT sensor from the interfering signal.
Regarding claim 8 of the pending application, claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein at least one of the first value and the second value are inherently predetermined.
Regarding claim 9 of the pending application, claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including when the AGC is saturated, determining a first threshold indicative of a received signal strength when the IoT component is actively transmitting to the first IoT sensor and a transponder in the first IoT sensor is inactive; determining whether a first ratio of a currently received signal strength is greater or less than the first threshold; when the first ratio is less than the first threshold, determining if a second ratio for when the transponder in the first IoT sensor is active is greater than a second threshold; and when the second ratio is greater than the second threshold, determining if a current power level for the AGC is greater than the maximum power level setting for the AGC; when the current power level is greater than the maximum power level, implementing at least one of one or more remediation options; determining whether the AGC is saturated at the second power level; when the first ratio is greater than the first threshold, determining if the AGC is saturated at the first power level; and when the AGC is saturated at the first power level, implementing at least one remediation option.
Regarding claim 10 of the pending application, claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including a process comprising: measuring, for an Automatic Gain Controller (AGC) in an Internet-of-Things (TOT) sensor, a quiescent AGC value; detecting an interfering signal emitted by an active Signal Interference Source (SIS);determining, while the interfering signal is detected, an SIS active value; wherein the SIS active value is determined by the AGC for the IoT sensor; determining a signal strength power difference between the quiescent AGC value and the SIS active value; and adjusting, based on the signal strength power difference, an AGC level in the first IoT sensor.
Regarding claim 11 of the pending application, claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 obviously encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the signal strength power difference represents a radio frequency signal power received from the SIS.
Regarding claim 12 of the pending application, claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including obtaining multiple AGC values from multiple IoT sensors located near a geographic boundary for the SIS; and extrapolating from the multiple AGC values a radio frequency signal strength for the SIS.
Regarding claim 13 of the pending application, claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including adjusting at least one AGC level in another IoT sensor based on the signal strength power difference determined by the first IoT sensor.
Regarding claim 14 of the pending application, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including process, for identifying and detecting a mobile interfering signal, comprising: conducting a scan of one or more frequency bands to obtain at least one scan result; determining, from the at least one scan result, if an interfering signal has been detected; if the interfering signal has been detected: receiving first scan data from a first IoT sensor; identifying, based on the first scan data, a first property for a first characteristic for the interfering signal; receiving second scan data from the first IoT sensor; identifying, based on the second scan data, a second property for the first characteristic for the interfering signal; determining whether the first property and the second property for the first characteristic differ; and when "Yes," designating the interfering signal as arising from a potential MSIS.
Regarding claim 15 of the pending application, claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein the first characteristic is a detected signal strength for the interfering signal.
Regarding claim 16 of the pending application, claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including receiving third scan data from a second IoT sensor; analyzing the third scan data to determine if the interfering signal is present in the third scan data; when "Yes," identifying a third property for the first characteristic for the interfering signal; receiving fourth scan data from the second IoT sensor; analyzing the fourth scan data to identify a fourth property for the interfering signal; determining whether the third property and the fourth property for the first characteristic differ; and when "Yes," designating the interfering signal as arising from a determined MSIS.
Regarding claim 17 of the pending application, claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including determining a first location of the MSIS based on a difference between the first property and the third property; and determining a second location of the MSIS based on a difference between the second property and the third property.
Regarding claim 18 of the pending application, claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including determining a direction of travel of the MSIS based on a difference between the first property and the second property; and determining a speed of the MSIS based on a difference between the third property and the fourth property.
Regarding claim 19 of the pending application, claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including analyzing at least one of the first property in view of the second property and the third property in view of the fourth property to determine a direction of travel for the MSIS.
Regarding claim 20 of the pending application, claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,212,377 encompasses all the claimed limitations including instructing the first IoT sensor to continually scan for the interfering signal; instructing a second IoT sensor to continually scan for the interfering signal; and instructing a third IoT sensor to continually scan for the interfering signal.
Claims 1-3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,201,682. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-3 are being obvious over claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,201,682.
Regarding claim 1 of the pending application, claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,201,682 obviously encompasses all the claimed limitations including a process comprising: receiving, by an Internet-of-Things (IoT) sensor, an interfering signal received from a Signal Interference Source (SIS);wherein the IoT sensor includes an Automatic Gain Controller (AGC);determining whether a combined signal saturates the AGC; wherein the combined signal includes the interfering signal and a second signal received from an IoT component; wherein the IoT component includes at least one of a frequency manager, an IoT frequency controller, and another IoT sensor; when the AGC is saturated: determining a first ratio of when a second signal is received from the IoT component while the AGC is saturated; determining if the first ratio is greater than a first value; and when the first ratio is greater than the first value, remediating the interfering signal by decreasing an output power of the IoT component (IoT controller) which obviously decreasing an output power of a transponder for the IoT component.
Regarding claim 2 of the pending application, claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,201,682 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein remediating the interfering signal further comprises: moving the IoT sensor to a location further away from the SIS.
Regarding claim 3 of the pending application, claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,201,682 encompasses all the claimed limitations including wherein remediating the interfering signal further comprises: shielding the IoT sensor from the interfering signal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 10,405,229 B2) disclose a method and apparatus for controlling interference between Internet of Things (IoT) devices, includes: selecting a device that will execute interference avoidance among devices that are capable of performing an inter-thing communication by taking a traffic type into consideration; and receiving interference avoidance information required for the interference avoidance from the device that will execute the interference avoidance.
Eskildsen et al. (US 10,966,143 B2) teach a method for detecting and avoiding radio interference in a wireless sensor network can include an access point device periodically transmitting a beacon message to a plurality of IoT enabled devices via a radio channel, upon receipt of the beacon message, an IoT enabled device attempting to decode the beacon message, the IoT enabled device measuring and storing a signal strength of a successfully decoded beacon message as signal strength data in a memory of the IoT enabled device, the IoT enabled device increasing a missed beacon counter stored in the memory of the IoT enabled device responsive to a beacon message that cannot be decoded, each of the plurality of IoT enabled devices periodically transmitting stored data to the access point device, and the access point device using the received data to identify an interference source, or an interference issue or a fading issue on the radio channel.
Bohl (WO 2021037685 A1) disclose a method for monitoring an IoT (Internet of Things) cell of a radio access network, the method comprising the steps of monitoring an IoT node, the monitored IoT node servicing an IoT cell of a radio access network and having a known position, and detecting an interference of the IoT cell serviced by the monitored IoT node.
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