Prior art — US Patent 8730833

Prior Art Analysis

The following prior art references were cited by the USPTO examiner during the prosecution of US patent 8,730,833. This analysis focuses on the potential for these references to anticipate the independent claims of the patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

US Patent 7,778,644 B2 (Chandra et al.)

Full Citation: US Patent 7,778,644 B2, "Agile Spectrum Access," filed Aug 1, 2006, issued Aug 17, 2010. Assignee: Microsoft Corporation.
Brief Description: The '644 patent describes a system for dynamic spectrum access where wireless devices can operate in licensed spectrum bands on a secondary basis. It discloses a "spectrum access manager" (SAM) that receives requests from client devices for spectrum access. The SAM consults a database of incumbent (primary) users and policies to determine available channels. It then grants a lease for a specific channel to the client device for a set duration. The system is designed to allow secondary use of spectrum without interfering with primary license holders.
Potential Anticipation of Claims:
- Claim 1 (Method): This reference appears to disclose several elements of claim 1. The client device's request to the SAM can be seen as negotiating frequency use. The SAM's grant of a channel lease is enabling the wireless device to operate using a frequency... allowed by the wireless network. The process is initiated when the client device needs spectrum, which corresponds to detecting activation. However, a key distinction is that the '644 patent focuses on a centralized SAM and a database lookup to find "white space" rather than an interactive negotiation with the primary network's own control elements (like an RRC) to actively clear a channel that the primary network could have been using. Therefore, it likely does not anticipate the specific "negotiation" with the wireless network itself as claimed.
- Claim 24 (Wireless Network): The SAM in the '644 patent performs a similar function to the RRC in claim 24 by receiving a request and granting access. However, the SAM appears to be a separate entity that relies on a pre-compiled database of primary user locations and schedules, rather than being an integrated RRC of the primary network that dynamically reconfigures its own base stations in real-time in response to a request from a secondary user's associated UE. This difference in architecture may prevent a direct anticipation finding.

US Patent 8,588,806 B2 (Mishra et al.)

Full Citation: US Patent 8,588,806 B2, "Dynamic Spectrum Access in Cognitive Radio Networks," filed Dec 19, 2008, issued Nov 19, 2013. Assignee: Microsoft Corporation.
Brief Description: The '806 patent describes a system where cognitive radios (secondary users) can access licensed spectrum. It proposes a central database that contains information about the availability of spectrum based on the location and time-of-day of primary user activity. A secondary device queries this database to identify available channels. The system also includes a mechanism for the database to send "emergency" messages to secondary users to vacate a channel if a primary user (like a wireless microphone) becomes active unexpectedly.
Potential Anticipation of Claims:
- Claim 1 (Method): Similar to the '644 patent, Mishra describes a system where a secondary device requests and is granted permission to use spectrum. This aligns with the negotiating and enabling steps. The trigger is the secondary user's need for spectrum, akin to detecting activation. However, the core mechanism is a database lookup, not a direct, real-time negotiation with the primary network's operational control plane. The '806 patent describes informing secondary users to vacate a channel for a primary user, but not the specific scenario of a secondary user negotiating with a primary cellular network to have that network constrain its own base stations.
- Claim 24 (Wireless Network): The central database in the '806 patent is analogous to the RRC in its role as a central authority for spectrum access. It receives requests and provides channel information. However, it is presented as a registry of spectrum availability rather than an active control element of the primary wireless network itself. Claim 24 requires the RRC to be a component of the primary network that controls one or more base stations to constrain their use of the allowed frequency. The '806 patent's database does not appear to have this direct, dynamic control over the primary network's infrastructure.

US Patent Application Publication 2007/0254692 A1 (Channabasappa)

Full Citation: US 2007/0254692 A1, "System and Method for Accessing a Shared Communication Channel," filed Apr 28, 2006, published Nov 1, 2007. Assignee: Motorola, Inc.
Brief Description: This application describes a "channel manager" that coordinates access to a shared communication channel between different radio access technologies (e.g., a cellular network and a WLAN). A device sends a channel access request to the channel manager. The manager checks for channel availability and potential interference with other systems and can grant or deny the request. The system is designed to facilitate coexistence between disparate networks operating in the same frequency band.
Potential Anticipation of Claims:
- Claim 1 (Method): Channabasappa discloses a negotiating step (the access request) and an enabling step (the grant from the channel manager). The system is activated when a device needs channel access. The key question for anticipation is whether the "channel manager" is part of the "wireless network" as recited in the claims of the '833 patent. The '692 application describes the channel manager as a coordinating entity, but it may not be an integral part of the primary cellular network's RRC that dynamically adjusts that network's own resource allocation. It appears to be more of an overlay or intermediary.
- Claim 24 (Wireless Network): The "channel manager" in the '692 application functions like an RRC. It receives requests and provides access grants. However, like the prior art above, it is not explicitly described as an RRC of a primary network that then controls its own base stations to free up the spectrum for the requesting secondary device. The focus is on arbitrating access between different systems rather than having one system modify its own behavior to accommodate another.

US Patent Application Publication 2011/0034190 A1 (Wentink)

Full Citation: US 2011/0034190 A1, "Coexistence Negotiation," filed Aug 10, 2009, published Feb 10, 2011. Assignee: QUALCOMM Incorporated.
Brief Description: Wentink describes a method for coexistence between different wireless systems (e.g., Wi-Fi and Bluetooth) operating in the same unlicensed band. One device sends a "coexistence request" to another device, proposing a specific time-frequency allocation. The second device can accept, reject, or propose a different allocation. This creates a direct negotiation between the two co-located devices to deconflict their use of the shared spectrum.
Potential Anticipation of Claims:
- Claim 1 (Method): This reference teaches a clear negotiating step between two wireless systems to coordinate frequency use. One device is enabled to operate based on the outcome of this negotiation. However, the context is peer-to-peer negotiation between two co-located, independent devices (like Bluetooth and Wi-Fi in the same handset) in an unlicensed band. It does not describe the specific hierarchical relationship of the '833 patent, where a low-power, "non-network" device negotiates with the central control plane (RRC) of a wide-area, "overlying wireless network" (like a cellular network) to have that network clear spectrum. This contextual difference is likely sufficient to avoid anticipation.
- Claim 24 (Wireless Network): Wentink does not describe a system with a central RRC controlling base stations in a wide-area network. The negotiation is distributed and peer-to-peer. Therefore, it does not anticipate claim 24.