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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 13 – 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 19, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites the limitation “The method of claim 12” should have been “The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1 - 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1 - 20 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,323,203. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Instant application
Patent 12,323,203
Claim 1: A method of providing defective transmit chain mitigation, comprising: determining, in a telecommunications system having a Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna system, a set of defective transmit chains within a group of transmit chains; retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements; computing a pre-coding matrix taking into account the defective transmit chains; and transmitting signals using the MIMO antenna system in accordance with the computed pre-coding matrix.
Claim 1: A method of providing defective transmit chain mitigation, comprising: determining, in a telecommunications system having a Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna system, a set of defective transmit chains within a group of transmit chains; retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements; computing a pre-coding matrix taking into account the defective transmit chains; and transmitting signals using the MIMO antenna system in accordance with the computed pre-coding matrix
Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the telecommunications system is a 5G system.
Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the telecommunications system is a 5G system.
Claim 3: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by sampling an antenna array of the MIMO antenna system.
Claim 3: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by sampling an antenna array of the MIMO antenna system.
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by indirectly sampling an antenna array of the MIMO antenna system.
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by indirectly sampling an antenna array of the MIMO antenna system.
Claim 5: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel.
Claim 5: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel.
Claim 6: he method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel using stored simulation signatures.
Claim 6: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel using stored simulation signatures.
Claim 7: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a channel estimation error of the observed channel with a simulated stored channel estimation error.
Claim 7: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a channel estimation error of the observed channel with a simulated stored channel estimation error.
Claim 8: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a precoding frequency resolution of the observed channel with a simulated stored precoding frequency resolution.
Claim 8: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a precoding frequency resolution of the observed channel with a simulated stored precoding frequency resolution.
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a phase noise of the observed channel with a simulated stored phase noise.
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a phase noise of the observed channel with a simulated stored phase noise.
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether a set of defective transmit chains are aligned in a single column of transmission elements.
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether a set of defective transmit chains are aligned in a single column of transmission elements.
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements based on simulations.
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements based on simulations.
Claim 12: A non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions which, when executed at a processor on a telecommunications system having an array of transmission elements, performs steps comprising: determining, in a telecommunications system having a Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna system, a set of defective transmit chains within a group of transmit chains; retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements; computing a pre-coding matrix taking into account the defective transmit chains; and transmitting signals using the MIMO antenna system in accordance with the computed pre-coding matrix.
Claim 12: A non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions which, when executed at a processor on a telecommunications system having an array of transmission elements, performs steps comprising: determining, in a telecommunications system having a Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna system, a set of defective transmit chains within a group of transmit chains; retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements; computing a pre-coding matrix taking into account the defective transmit chains; and transmitting signals using the MIMO antenna system in accordance with the computed pre-coding matrix.
Claim 13: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by indirectly sampling the antenna array.
Claim 13: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by indirectly sampling the antenna array.
Claim 14: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing the channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel.
Claim 14: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel.
Claim 15: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing the channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel using stored simulation signatures.
Claim 15: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and performing computational analysis on the observed channel using stored simulation signatures.
Claim 16: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing the channel and comparing a channel estimation error of the observed channel with a simulated stored channel estimation error.
Claim 16: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a channel estimation error of the observed channel with a simulated stored channel estimation error.
Claim 17: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing the channel and comparing a precoding frequency resolution of the observed channel with a simulated stored precoding frequency resolution.
Claim 17: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a precoding frequency resolution of the observed channel with a simulated stored precoding frequency resolution.
Claim 18: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing the channel and comparing a phase noise of the observed channel with a simulated stored phase noise.
Claim 18: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining the set of defective transmit chains by observing a channel and comparing a phase noise of the observed channel with a simulated stored phase noise.
Claim 19: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining whether the set of defective transmit chains are aligned in a single column of transmission elements.
Claim 19: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising determining whether the set of defective transmit chains are aligned in a single column of transmission elements.
Claim 20: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements based on simulations.
Claim 20: The method of claim 12, the steps further comprising retrieving, from a storage medium, stored characteristics of defective transmission elements based on simulations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAISON JOSEPH whose telephone number is (571)272-6041. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 - 4.
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 K 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.
JAISON . JOSEPH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2633
/JAISON JOSEPH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights