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 .
Status of the Claims
The preliminary amendment of March 24, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.” Therefore, the references cited in the international search report have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 24, 2025 has been considered by the examiner. An initialed copy of the IDS is included with this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 4, the examiner suggests adding “COLLECTING UNIT” to element 40 as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
570
344
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: on page 7, line 7, “Advantageous Effect of the Invention” should be “BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 1, it appears that “the base station” on lines 9, 11, 32 and 38, respectively, should be “each base station” (see claim 1, line 7);
in claim 1, line 32, “an” should be inserted before “allocated power”;
in claim 1, line 41, “each of the base stations” should be “each base station”;
in claim 2, “configured to” should be inserted after “circuitry” on line 3 and “by changing” on line 5 should be “changes”;
in claim 2, line 5, “the base station” should be “each base station”;
in claim 3, line 10, “an” should be inserted before “allocated power”;
in claim 3, “the base station” on lines 10 and 16, respectively, should be “each base station”;
in claim 3, line 19, “each of the base stations” should be “each base station”;
in claim 4, “configured to” should be inserted after “circuitry” on line 2 and “by changing” on line 4 should be “changes”;
in claim 4, “the base station” on lines 4 and 7, respectively, should be “each base station”;
in claim 5, line 8, “an” should be inserted before “allocated power”;
in claim 5, “the base station” on lines 9 and 13, respectively, should be “each base station”;
in claim 5, line 16, “each of the base stations” should be “each base station”;
in claim 6, “in parameter calculating, the parameter” on lines 3-4 should be “calculating the parameter” and “by” on line 5 should be “comprises”;
in claim 6, “the base station” on lines 5 and 8, respectively, should be “each base station”; and
in claim 7, line 1, the examiner suggests changing “to function as each circuitry” to “to perform the function of each circuitry.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. (See MPEP 2163)
With regard to claims 1 and 3, the specification, at the time the application was filed, does not describe each of the allocated power calculating circuitry, the parameter calculating circuitry and the use efficiency control circuitry in claims 1, lines 31-42 and claim 3, lines 9-21, respectively, with sufficient particularity such that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor or a joint invention, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification generally describes each of the circuitries as being configured to provide an output or a function based on particular signals but the detailed description does not provide any details of how each of the circuitries generate the respective output or function based on the recited signals such that it conveys to convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The disclosure does not provide any details as to how the allocated power calculating unit is configured to calculate “the allocated power with respect to each of the terminals of [each] base station based on the terminal position information, the power intensity information and the residual amount of information collected.” The detailed description does not provide any structure, steps or equations for using any or all of the collected information to “calculate allocated power” nor does the disclosure describe a relationship between the respective collected information and the allocated power such that the allocated power can be calculated/determined. For example, the disclosure does not describe how a particular value of an information affects/changes an allocated power.
Furthermore, the disclosure does not provide any details as to how the parameter calculating unit is configured to calculate a parameter, based on the calculated allocated power, that optimizes band allocation and power use efficiency as recited. The detailed description does not describe any structure, steps or equations that uses the “calculated allocated power” to calculate the recited “parameter.” Furthermore, the disclosure does not describe how the ”parameter” relates to bandwidth allocation and/or power use efficiency with respective to the terminals such that the “parameter” optimizes bandwidth allocation and power use efficiency of the terminals to minimize power consumption while raising power use efficiency of the entire system.
The discloses also does not provide any details as to how the use efficiency control circuitry is configured to control use efficiency of transmitted power of the RF signal transmitted by each base station according to the calculated parameter. The detailed description does not describe with any structure, steps or equations for using the calculated parameter to adjusts/control the transmitted power of the RF signal transmitted by a base station based on an efficiency consideration or that uses a calculated parameter to control the transmitted power. For example, the disclosure does not describe how a particular value of the calculated parameter increases/decreases the transmitted power of the RF signal.
With regard to claim 5, the specification, at the time the application was filed, does not describe with sufficient particularity the steps of calculating allocated power; calculating, based on the allocated power, a parameter; and controlling use efficiency of transmitted power on lines 8-17 such that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification generally describes each of the steps as providing an output or a function based on particular signals but the detailed description does not provide any details of how each of the steps generate the respective output or function based on the recited signals such that it conveys to convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The disclosure does not provide any details as to how to calculate “the allocated power with respect to each of the terminals of [each] base station based on the terminal position information, the power intensity information and the residual amount of information collected.” The detailed description does not describe any structure, steps or equations for using any or all of the collected information to “calculate allocated power” nor does the disclosure describe a relationship between the respective collected information and the allocated power such that the allocated power can be calculated/determined. For example, the disclosure does not describe how a particular value of an information affects/changes an allocated power.
Furthermore, the disclosure does not provide any details as to how to calculate a parameter, based on the calculated allocated power, that optimizes band allocation and power use efficiency as recited. The detailed description does not describe any structure or equations that uses the “calculated allocated power” to calculate “a parameter.” There are also no details about how the ”parameter” relates to bandwidth allocation and/or power use efficiency with respective to the terminals such that the “parameter” optimizes bandwidth allocation and power use efficiency of the terminals to minimize power consumption while raising power use efficiency of the entire system.
The discloses also does not provide any details as to how to control use efficiency of transmitted power of the RF signal transmitted by each base station according to the calculated parameter. The detailed description does not provide with sufficient particularity any structure, steps or equations for using the calculated parameter to adjusts/control the transmitted power of the RF signal transmitted by a base station based on an efficiency consideration or that uses a calculated parameter to control the transmitted power. For example, the disclosure does not describe how a particular value of the calculated parameter increases/decreases the transmitted power of the RF signal.
Dependent claim(s) are rejected under the same ground(s) as the claim(s) from which it depends.
Claims 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the entire system” in line 39. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the entire system” in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the storage battery” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the entire system” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claim(s) are rejected under the same ground(s) as the claim(s) from which it depends.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Betsy Deppe whose telephone number is 571-272-3054. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday and Thursday, 7:00 am - 3:00 pm (ET).
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, Sam Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/BETSY DEPPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights