UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/404,992
`
`01/12/2017
`
`HIROSHI TAKAHASHI
`
`731156.575
`
`3875
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`GUADALUPE CRUZ” AIXA AMYR
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2466
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/21/2018
`
`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):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/404,992
`Examiner
`Aixa A Guadalupe-Cruz
`
`Applicant(s)
`TAKAHASHI et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`2466
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from 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, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 9/12/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 1/12/2017 is/are: a). accepted or b)E] 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:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in 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)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20181211
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA 0r AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`Responsive to amendments filed 9/12/2018.
`
`Claims 1—9 remain pending.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`The changes made to the title of the invention have been received and are accepted.
`
`Amendments to claims 2 and 5 resolve the issues previously presented objections.
`
`The present amendments overcome the previously presented 35 USC 112(b) rejections.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot
`
`because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 103
`
`8.
`
`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 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.
`
`9.
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 3
`
`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.
`
`10.
`
`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.
`
`11.
`
`Claims 1—9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maltsev et al.
`
`(US Patent Application Publication 2014/0204902; hereinafter Maltsev) in view of Hong et al.
`
`(US Patent Application Publication 2014/0073337; hereinafter Hong).
`
`Regarding claims 1 and 7 Maltsev discloses a wireless communication device
`
`and a wireless communication method (figs. 1, 2 and 7), comprising:
`
`1st to Mth communication processors, respectively corresponding to 1st to Mth
`
`sectors (where M is an integer equal to or greater than 2) (see figs. 2, 5; paragraphs 0179,
`
`for example; wherein antenna array comprises elements which transmit to a sector),
`
`which in operation, each communicate with a wireless terminal by using a beam in any of
`
`N directions (where N is an integer equal to or greater than 2) in one of the 1st to Mth
`
`sectors (see figs. 2, 5; paragraphs 0138, 0179, 0183, , for example; wherein the beams in
`
`many directions are used by the elements to communicate with terminals); and
`
`a handover controller, which in operation, determines whether or not to perform a
`
`handover from the 1st communication processor to a second communication processor,
`
`according to a position in a 1st sector of the beam used by the 1st communication
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 4
`
`processor, the position which is relative to a boundary between the lSt sector and a 2m1
`
`sector adjacent to the lSt sector as a reference (paragraphs 0141-0145, 0148-0150;
`
`wherein the processing circuitry in base station 10] determines whether the terminal is to
`
`be handed over from a first sector to a second sector based on tracking the position of a
`
`beam, and movement of the terminal, among other; the closest to the boundary between
`
`the sectors, base station hands over the terminal from sector I to sector 2, for example), a
`
`communication quality between the lst communication processor and the wireless
`
`terminal (paragraphs 0087, 0096; wherein the link quality between the base station and
`
`terminal is measured).
`
`Maltsev does not explicitly disclose determine whether or not to perform
`
`handover according to a value related to traffic on the 2nd communication processor in
`
`the 2nd sector adjacent to the lst sector. However, Hong in the same field of endeavor,
`
`discloses determine whether or not to perform handover according to a value related to
`
`traffic on the 2nd communication processor in a 2nd sector adjacent to the lst sector (figs.
`
`22-24; paragraphs 0222, 0243-025]; wherein beam load is used for scheduling beam
`
`allocation and handover, note step 51125 in fig. 24A; note also that these figures
`
`describe LH-DBS or latency handover- distributed beam system). Therefore, it would
`
`have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
`
`date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Maltsev with the teachings of
`
`Hong in order to increase efficiency and quality of service (Hong: paragraph 02 74).
`
`Regarding claim 2 Maltsev in view of Hong disclose the wireless
`
`communication device according to claim 1, wherein the handover controller determines
`
`not to perform handover of the lst communication processor, and output a control signal
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 5
`
`instructing to extend a communication area provided by one beam used by the 1st
`
`communication processor (Maltsev: fig. 5, paragraphs 0084-0086, 0214-0218; wherein
`
`the phase shifters may adapt the width of the beam, changing its direction to extend the
`
`area until the beam meets the border between the sectors) in a case where all of
`
`conditions (i) to (iii) are satisfied, wherein the conditions (i) to (iii) comprise:
`
`(i) the position in the 1st sector of the beam used by the 1st communication
`
`processor is up to a Kth beam (where K is an integer equal to or greater than 1, and less
`
`than or equal to N/2) starting from the boundary between the 1st sector and the 2nd sector
`
`from among the beams in N directions (Maltsev; paragraphs 0141-0145, 0148-0150,
`
`0214-0218; wherein the processing circuitry in base station 10] determines whether the
`
`terminal is to be handed over from a first sector to a second sector based on tracking the
`
`position of a beam; the closest to the boundary between the sectors, base station hands
`
`over the terminal from sector I to sector 2, for example),
`
`(ii) the communication quality is less than or equal to a first threshold value
`
`(Maltsev: paragraphs 0087, 0096; wherein the link quality between the base station and
`
`terminal is measured).
`
`Maltsev does not explicitly disclose (iii) the value related to traffic is equal to or
`
`greater than a second threshold value. However, Hong in the same field of endeavor,
`
`discloses the value related to traffic is equal to or greater than a second threshold value
`
`(fig. 22; paragraphs 0216-0225; wherein beam load is used for scheduling beam
`
`allocation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 6
`
`Maltsev with the teachings of Hong in order to increase efficiency and quality of service
`
`(Hong: paragraph 0274).
`
`Regarding claim 3 Maltsev in view of Hong disclose the wireless
`
`communication device according to claim 2. Maltsev does not explicitly disclose wherein
`
`the 1st communication processor is configured with a plurality of modulation and coding
`
`schemes (MCSes) that indicate a combination of a modulation scheme and a coding
`
`scheme, and changes the MCS used by the 1st communication processor to the MCS with
`
`the lowest communication rate according to the control signal. However, Hong discloses
`
`wherein the 1st communication processor is configured with a plurality of modulation
`
`and coding schemes (MCSes) that indicate a combination of a modulation scheme and a
`
`coding scheme, and changes the MCS used by the 1st communication processor to the
`
`MCS with the lowest communication rate according to the control signal (paragraphs
`
`0198, 0225, 0264; wherein the system looks to maintain the optimal rate for each beam).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before
`
`the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Maltsev with
`
`the teachings of Hong in order to increase efficiency and quality of service (Hong:
`
`paragraph 0274).
`
`Regarding claim 4 Maltsev in view of Hong disclose the wireless
`
`communication device according to claim 1, wherein the handover controller additionally
`
`determines whether or not to perform the handover of the 1st communication processor
`
`according to a communication area provided by one beam used by the 1st communication
`
`processor (Maltsev: paragraphs 008], 0092, 0093; the handover is performed according
`
`to coverage area for each sector).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding claim 5 Maltsev in view of Hong disclose the wireless
`
`communication device according to claim 4, wherein the handover controller determines
`
`to perform handover of the 1st communication processor in a case where all of conditions
`
`(iv) to (vii) are satisfied, wherein the conditions (iv) to (vii) comprise:
`
`(iv) the position in the 1st sector of the beam used by the 1st communication
`
`processor is up to a Kth beam (where K is an integer equal to or greater than 1, and less
`
`than or equal to N/2) starting from a boundary between the 1st sector and the 2nd sector
`
`from among the beams in N directions (Maltsev: paragraphs 0141-0145, 0148-0150,
`
`0214-0218; wherein the processing circuitry in base station 10] determines whether the
`
`terminal is to be handed over from a first sector to a second sector based on tracking the
`
`position of a beam; the closest to the boundary between the sectors, base station hands
`
`over the terminal from sector I to sector 2, for example),
`
`(v) the communication quality is less than or equal to a first threshold value
`
`(Maltsev: paragraphs 0087, 0096; wherein the link quality between the base station and
`
`terminal is measured), and
`
`(vii) the communication area provided by one beam used by the 1st
`
`communication processor is the widest (Maltsev: paragraphs 008], 0092, 0093; the
`
`handover is performed according to coverage area for each sector).
`
`Maltsev does not explicitly disclose (vi) the value related to traffic is equal to or
`
`greater than a second threshold value. However, Hong in the same field of endeavor,
`
`discloses the value related to traffic is equal to or greater than a second threshold value
`
`(fig. 22; paragraphs 0216-0225; wherein beam load is used for scheduling beam
`
`allocation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 8
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of
`
`Maltsev with the teachings of Hong in order to increase efficiency and quality of service
`
`(Hong: paragraph 0274).
`
`Regarding claim 6 Maltsev in view of Hong disclose the wireless
`
`communication device according to claim 1, wherein the lst to Mth communication
`
`processors use a millimeter wave band (Maltsev: paragraphs 0030, 0053, 0062, for
`
`example).
`
`Regarding claims 8 and 9 Maltsev discloses a control device and a control
`
`method (figs. 1, 2 and 7), comprising:
`
`a communicator, which in operation, connects to a wireless communication
`
`device including lst to Mth communication processors (where M is an integer equal to or
`
`greater than 2), which in operation, each communicate with a wireless terminal, the
`
`wireless communication device using for the communication a beam in any of N
`
`directions (where N is an integer equal to or greater than 2) in one of the lst to Mth
`
`communication processors that respectively correspond to lst to Mth sectors (see figs. 2,
`
`5; paragraphs 0179, for example; wherein antenna array comprises elements which
`
`transmit to a sector; see figs. 2, 5; paragraphs 0138, 0179, 0183, , for example; wherein
`
`the beams in many directions are used by the elements to communicate with terminals),
`
`and the communicator receives information related to a handover determination,
`
`including a position in the lst sector of the beam used by the lst communication
`
`processor of the wireless communication device, the position which is relative to a
`
`boundary between the lSt sector and a 2m1 sector adjacent to the lSt sector as a reference
`
`(paragraphs 0141-0145, 0148-0150; wherein the processing circuitry in base station 10]
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 9
`
`determines whether the terminal is to be handed over from a first sector to a second
`
`sector based on tracking the position of a beam, and movement of the terminal, among
`
`other; the closest to the boundary between the sectors, base station hands over the
`
`terminal from sector I to sector 2, for example), a communication quality between the lst
`
`communication processor of the wireless communication device and the wireless terminal
`
`(paragraphs 0087, 0096; wherein the link quality between the base station and terminal
`
`is measured); and
`
`a handover controller, which in operation, determines whether or not to perform
`
`handover from the lst communication processor of the wireless communication device to
`
`a 2‘101 communication processor by using the received information related to the handover
`
`determination (paragraphs 0141-0145, 0148-0150; wherein the processing circuitry in
`
`base station 10] determines whether the terminal is to be handed over from a first sector
`
`to a second sector based on tracking the position of a beam, and movement of the
`
`terminal, among other; the closest to the boundary between the sectors, base station
`
`hands over the terminal from sector I to sector 2, for example).
`
`Maltsev does not explicitly disclose determine whether or not to perform
`
`handover according to a value related to traffic on a 2nd communication processor of the
`
`wireless communication device3 corresponding to the 2m1 sector adjacent to the lSt sector.
`
`However, Hong in the same field of endeavor, discloses determine whether or not to
`
`perform handover according to a value related to traffic on the 2nd communication
`
`processor in a 2nd sector adjacent to the lst sector (fig. 22; paragraphs 0216-0225;
`
`wherein beam load is used for scheduling beam allocation). Therefore, it would have
`
`been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/404,992
`Art Unit: 2466
`
`Page 10
`
`the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Maltsev with the teachings of Hong in
`
`order to increase efficiency and quality of service (Hang: paragraph 02 74).
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR l.l36(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO
`
`MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after
`
`the end of the THREE—MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period
`
`will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37
`
`CFR l.l36(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event,
`
`however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing
`
`date of this final action.
`
`13.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to Aixa A Guadalupe—Cruz whose telephone number is (571)270—
`
`7523. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday — Thursday 7AM — 5:30PM.
`
`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.
`
`