www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/441,753
`
`09/22/2021
`
`Hiroaki SUDO
`
`WASHN-65121
`
`8847
`
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND,OH 44114-3108
`
`NGUYEN, HANH N
`
`2413
`
`12/06/2023
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patdocket@ pearne.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-21 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CL] Claim(s)__is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-7,9 and 11-21 is/are rejected.
`Claim(s) 2,5,8-10 and 19-20 is/are objected to.
`C) Claim(s
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)2) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)M The drawing(s)filed on 9/22/2021 is/are: a)¥) accepted or b)C) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)(¥) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)() None ofthe:
`b)( Some**
`a) All
`1.@) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20231130
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`171441,753
`SUDO, Hiroaki
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`HANH N NGUYEN
`2413
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 9/22/2021.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA orAIA 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 2,5,8,9,10,19,20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`In claim 2, the claimed limitation “classifies interference including the second
`
`interference into the second interference” is objected to because it does not indicate a
`
`clear meaning for one skilled in the art to understand.
`
`Further, the claimed limitation “including the second interference includes
`
`information on the second interference”is also objected to becauseit is redundant and
`
`does not provide a clear meaning. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`In claim 5, the claimed limitation “the controller generates the information on
`
`the third interference, not including a comparison result with any threshold greater than
`
`the fourth threshold and included in the plurality of third thresholds” is objected to
`
`becauseit is not clearly defined.
`
`In claim 8, the claimed limitation “the controller reduces an information content of the
`
`information on the third interference in the notification” is objected to becauseit does
`
`not provide a clear meaning.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 3
`
`In claim 9, the claimed limitation “sets a notification frequency of the information
`
`on the third interference to a frequency different from a notification frequency of the
`
`information on the first interference” is objected to because it does not provide a clear
`
`meaning.
`
`In claim 10, the claimed limitation “the controller decreases a notification
`
`frequency of the information on the third interference in a steady state where an
`
`interference amount of the third interference exceeds a predetermined amount
`
`continuously over a predetermined time with respect to a notification frequency of the
`
`information on the third interference in a state other than the steady state” is objected
`
`to because it does not provide a clear meaning.
`
`In claim 19, the claimed limitation “classifies the second interference into third
`
`interference from a radio apparatus that supportsthe first radio system and that
`
`belongs to a second network different from the first network and fourth interference
`
`from a radio apparatus that supports a second radio system different from the first
`
`radio system”is objected to becauseit does not provide a clear meaning.
`
`Further in claim 19, the claimed limitation “the information on the second
`
`interference includes information on the third interference and includes information on
`
`the fourth interference in a state where the second radio system is higher in priority
`
`than the first radio system”is also objected to becauseit does not provide a clear
`
`meaning.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 4
`
`In claim 20, the claimed limitation “the information on the second interference
`
`indicates a statistical amount of an interference amount of the third interference and an
`
`interference amount of the fourth interference in a state where the second radio
`
`system is higher in priority than the first radio system”is objected to because it does not
`
`provide a clear meaning.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`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.
`
`Claims 1-7,9,11-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by
`
`Gilson et al. (US Pat.10,490,059).
`
`In claims 1,12,21 Gilson et al. discloses a base station that supports a first radio
`
`system and that belongsto a first network (see fig.8; col.11; line 63 to col.12; line 1;
`
`col.2; lines 50-65; a monitor 802 (a base station) in a resident home ( a first network).
`
`The monitor 802 functions as a wireless gateway 101 shown in fig.1 to operate in low-
`
`power protocol such as LORAWAN (a first radio system)), the base station comprising:
`
`an interference classification processor ( see fig.2; monitor 802 may be a wireless
`
`gateway 200including a processor 201 (interference classification processor)) that
`
`classifies interference including first interference from a radio apparatus that supports
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 5
`
`the first radio system and that belongs to the first network, and second interference
`
`from a radio apparatus that supports the first radio system and that belongs to a second
`
`network different from the first network ( see fig.10; steps 1001, 1002, col.14; line 62 to
`
`col.15; line 45; the monitor 802 receives noise measurements from security device 803 (
`
`a radio apparatus belongsto the first network), determines an interference for the
`
`security device 803 because an interfering device 805 ( see fig.8; col.12; lines 13-22; a
`
`radio apparatus belongs to a second network different from the first network)
`
`intentionally increases wireless noise to block/disable or to impair the message
`
`transmitted from the security device 803 to the monitor device 802); and a controller
`
`that outputs notification information including information on the first interference and
`
`information on interference including the second interference to a control apparatus of
`
`the first network ( see fig.10; step 1006; col.16; lines 55-60; the monitor 802 sends a
`
`messageindicating that one or more devices is in an interference condition to a security
`
`personnel or a network controller 804 shown in fig.8 (col.12; lines 8-12; a control
`
`apparatus) associated with the resident home ( the first network). The message
`
`indicates the device 803 is interfered).
`
`In claim 2, Gilson et al. discloses the interferenceclassification processor
`
`classifies the interference including the second interference into the second
`
`interference and third interference from a radio apparatus that supports a second radio
`
`system different from the first radio system ( see col.15; lines 15-20, col.16; lines 15-25;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 6
`
`the monitor 802 determines whether security devices 803a,b receiving increased noise
`
`(second interference) from interfering device 805 { a radio apparatus supports second
`
`radio system); and the information on the interference including the second
`
`interference includes information on the second interference and information on the
`
`third interference ( see col.16; lines 15-25; small level of wireless noise ( third
`
`interference) from security devices 803c, 803d).
`
`In claim 3, Gilson et al. discloses the information on the first interference
`
`indicates a comparison result of an interference amount ofthe first interference with a
`
`first threshold ( see fig.10; step 1002; col.15; lines 12-20; monitor 802 determines the
`
`noise from security device 803 remains over a certain threshold ( a first threshold) for a
`
`period of time), the information on the second interference indicates a comparison
`
`result of an interference amount of the second interference with a second threshold (
`
`see col.15; lines 34-40; monitor 802 determines interferenceif it fails to receive
`
`transmission of from security device 803 for more than a threshold amount of time(
`
`second threshold)), the information on the third interference indicates a comparison
`
`result of an interference amount of the third interference with a third threshold ( see
`
`col.16; lines 15-25; monitor 802 detects noise from security devices 803c,d is relatively
`
`smaller) and the number of the third thresholds is greater than the number ofthe first
`
`thresholds.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 7
`
`In claim 4, Gilson et al. discloses the controller determines any one of a plurality
`
`of levels by comparing an interference amount of the third interference with a plurality
`
`of third thresholds and sets the determined level for the information on the third
`
`interference (see col.16; lines 65-col.17; line 10; monitor 802 determines different
`
`threat levels).
`
`In claim 5, Gilson et al. discloses when the interference amount of the third
`
`interference is less than or equal to a fourth threshold included in the plurality of third
`
`thresholds, the controller generates the information on the third interference, not
`
`including a comparison result with any threshold greater than the fourth threshold and
`
`included in the plurality of third thresholds (see fig.5A, col.6; lines 24-30; the wireless
`
`node 300 waits until a noise measurement of channel falls below the fixed noise
`
`threshold before attempting to transmit) .
`
`In claim 6, Gilson et al. discloses the plurality of third thresholds is set based on
`
`one or more communication modes in the first radio system ( see col.2; lines 58-67; the
`
`wireless nodes and gateways communicate via low power protocol while noise
`
`interference is determined based on the interfering device 805 that operates in cellular
`
`network ( col.3; lines 55-60) and/or a difference in transmission power in the one or
`
`more communication modes (see col.12; lines 50-54; the security device 803 determines
`
`noise level for a particular channel or band of channels by measuring strength ofsignal
`
`received).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 8
`
`In claim 7, Gilson et al. discloses the controller determinesa priority of the
`
`second radio system over the first radio system and adds priority information indicating
`
`the determined priority to the notification information ( see col.13; lines 40-45; security
`
`device 803 assigns high priority to message indicating noise increased{ information
`
`indicating priority of the notification information)).
`
`In claims 8,10 due to the unclear meaning of the claimed limitation addressed
`
`above, examiner holds the consideration until applicant files a response.
`
`In claim 9, Gilson et al. discloses the controller sets a notification frequency of the
`
`information on the third interference to a frequencydifferent from a notification
`
`frequency of the information on the first interference and/or the information on the
`
`second interference ( see col.12; lines 50-55; the security device 803 determines noise
`
`level for a band of channels ( a notification frequency).
`
`In claim 15, Gilson et al. discloses the controller outputsfirst notification
`
`information including the information on the first interference ( see col.12; lines 50-60;
`
`the security device 803 determines noise level at a particular channel) and second
`
`notification information including the information on the second interference at
`
`frequencies different from each other ( see col.12; lines 50-60; the security device 803
`
`determines noise level for a band of channels (second interference at frequencies
`
`different from each other)).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 9
`
`In claim 16, Gilson et al. discloses in the notification information, information on
`
`the first interference due to communication in a first communication mode ( see fig.9;
`
`step 909; col.2; lines 58-64 and col.13; lines 52-60; interference of security device 803
`
`operates in low power protocol) and information on the first interference due to
`
`communication in a second communication mode are distinguished from each other (
`
`see col.12; lines 12-22; and col.3; lines 55-60; Interference caused by interfering device
`
`805 operate in cellular network).
`
`In Claim 18, Gilson et al. discloses the first communication mode is a communication
`
`mode that uses a spread spectrum mode (see col.2; lines 58-65; the wireless node 102a-
`
`e and gateways 101 operate in low power protocol including LORAWAN), and the
`
`second communication mode is a communication mode that does not use a spread
`
`spectrum mode (see col.3; lines 55-60; network 108 includes computing device 109
`
`operate in cellular network).
`
`In claim 17, Gilson et al. discloses in the notification information, information on
`
`the first interference in a channel to be assigned to a first terminal that uses the first
`
`communication mode (see fig.1; col.2; lines 58-65; the wireless node 102 operates in
`
`low-power protocol including LORAWAN (a first communication mode) suffers wireless
`
`noise for a particular channel (col.12; lines 50-53) from the interfering device 805 (
`
`col.12; lines 12-30)),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 10
`
`information on the first interference in a channel to be assigned to a second
`
`terminal that uses the second communication mode (see col.12; lines 12-25, interfering
`
`device 805 operating in cellular network (col.3; lines 55-60; a second terminal uses a
`
`second communication mode) increases noise to disable the security device);
`
`and information on the first interference in a channel allowed to be assigned to
`
`any ofthe first terminal and the second terminal are distinguished from one another (
`
`the wireless device 802 is different from the interfering device 805).
`
`In claim 19, the interference classification processor classifies the second
`
`interferenceinto third interference from a radio apparatus that supports the first radio
`
`system and that belongs to a second network different from the first network and
`
`fourth interference from a radio apparatus that supports a second radio system
`
`different from the first radio system (due to the objection of this limitation addressed
`
`above, examiner holds the examination until a response from applicant),
`
`the interference classification processor determines a priority of the second radio
`
`system over the first radio system (see col.13; lines 40-45; the security device 803
`
`assigns a high/maximum priority to the message indicating the wireless noise increase),
`
`and
`
`the information on the second interference includes information on the third
`
`interference and includes information on the fourth interference in a state where the
`
`second radio system is higher in priority than the first radio system ( due to the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 11
`
`objection of this limitation addressed above, examiner holds the examination until a
`
`responsefrom applicant).
`
`In claim 20, Gilson et al. discloses the information on the second interference
`
`indicates a statistical anount of an interference amount of the third interference (see
`
`col.14; lines 27-31; the security device 803 detects that the interferenceis over (
`
`amount of interference amount of the third interference)) and an interference amount
`
`of the fourth interference in a state where the second radio system is higher in priority
`
`than the first radio system (col.14; lines the security device 803 detects the interference
`
`is over based on the most recent noise measurement is lower than a noise threshold).
`
`In claim 14, Gilson et al. discloses the information on the first interference
`
`indicates a statistical amount of the first interference in all of the plurality of channels (
`
`see col.12; lines 50-54; the security device 803 determines noise level for a particular
`
`channel or band of channels by measuring strength of signal received).
`
`In claim 11, Gilson et al. discloses the controller adds notification
`
`presence/absence information indicating whether the information on the third
`
`interference is included in the notification information to the notification information (
`
`see col.3; lines 30-50; the network computing device 109/controller 804 ( see col.12;
`
`lines 7-10) detects alarm condition, sends instructions to the security/traffic lights
`
`device 803 ( notification information) to change timing due to the increased
`
`interference).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 12
`
`In claim 13, Gilson et al. discloses in col.12; lines 50-59; security device
`
`determines noise level over a band of channels ( interference over two of more
`
`channels); and also discloses the statistical amount is at least one of a mean, a
`
`maximum, a minimum median of an interference amount of the first interference in
`
`each of the two or more channels (see col.12; lines 50-59; the security device 803
`
`samples and measures signal strength received over a small period of time, or sample
`
`the noise level on band of channels ( statistical amount is at least one of a mean,
`
`maximum, a minimum median of interference)).
`
`Conclusion
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure.
`
`Kim et al. (US Pub.2020/0389805; Method for Reporting Measurement data and
`
`terminal Therefor).
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to HANH N NGUYEN whosetelephone number is (571)272-
`
`3092. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3PM.
`
`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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/441,753
`Art Unit: 2413
`
`Page 13
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Un C Cho can be reached on 571 272 7919. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization wherethis 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.
`
`/HANH N NGUYEN/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
`
`