Notice of Pre-AIA or 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant remarks filed 05/11/2026 with respect to double patenting rejection have been fully considered in view of applicant response (i.e. since other rejection are currently outstanding in this matter…..). However, the double patenting rejection is maintained since no proper terminal disclaimer is being submitted yet.
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to 103 rejection of independent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Double Patenting
5. The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
A) Claims 1-6, 8-11 and 15-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-5, 7, 10-12, 14, 17-18, 20, 23, 26-27 and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2 in view of Liu (US 9,935,857 B1).
Instant application No. 17/536846
U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2
1. A method comprising: determining, by a computing device, a quantity of registration requests received by a server; comparing, by the computing device, the quantity with a plurality of thresholds, wherein the plurality comprises: a first threshold of expected registration requests, wherein the first threshold is associated with a first error source location; and a second threshold of expected registration requests, wherein the second threshold comprises less registration requests than the first threshold, and is associated with a second error source location; selecting one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity, and sending a network alert indicating the selected source of error as source of error in the communication network.
1. A method comprising: determining, by a computing device and for a plurality of repeating time intervals, a quantity of registration requests received by a server during each of the repeating time intervals; determining, based on the quantity of registration requests received by the server during each of the repeating time intervals, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server; retrieving, for a recent repeating time interval, a quantity of recent registration requests received by the server; determining a source of an error based on determining whether the quantity of recent registration requests satisfies a first threshold or a second threshold of the expected quantity of registration requests, wherein the quantity of recent registration requests satisfying the first threshold is associated with a first source of error and the quantity of recent registration requests satisfying the second threshold is associated with a second source of error; and sending a network alert indicating the determined source of the error.
The claim 1 of instant application encompass the same subject matter except “selecting one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity.”
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches selecting one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity (Col.9, lines 27-61 and Col.11, lines 31-50, identifying and filtering (i.e. selecting) possible problem/error sources in the communication network based on trigger threshold of multiple trigger thresholds exceeds or met by level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to implement US 9,935,857 B1 because it was notoriously well known to provide a method and/or system for use with a system that includes a plurality of SIP servers that are configured and arranged to provide services for a respective set of endpoints and detect potential problem sources for the connectivity problems.
Nonetheless, the removal of said limitation from claim 1 of the current application made these claim as a broader version of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2. Therefore, since omission of an element and its function in a combination is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same functions as before (In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184 (1963)), claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2 and claim 1 of the current application is not patentably distinct from each other.
B) Claims 2-6 of instant application correspond to claims 4,5,7,10-12 of allowed U.S. patent 11,223,945 B2.
C) The claim 8 of instant application encompass the same subject matter except “select one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity.”
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches select one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity (Col.9, lines 27-61 and Col.11, lines 31-50, identifying and filtering (i.e. selecting) possible problem/error sources in the communication network based on trigger threshold of multiple trigger thresholds exceeds or met by level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to implement US 9,935,857 B1 because it was notoriously well known to provide a method and/or system for use with a system that includes a plurality of SIP servers that are configured and arranged to provide services for a respective set of endpoints and detect potential problem sources for the connectivity problems.
Nonetheless, the removal of said limitation from claim 1 of the current application made these claim as a broader version of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2. Therefore, since omission of an element and its function in a combination is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same functions as before (In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184 (1963)), claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2 and claim 1 of the current application is not patentably distinct from each other.
D) Claims 9-11 of instant application correspond to claims 17, 18, and 20 of allowed U.S. patent 11,223,945 B2.
E) The claim 15 of instant application encompass the same subject matter except “selecting one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity.”
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches selecting one of the two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold of the plurality of threshold is met by quantity (Col.9, lines 27-61 and Col.11, lines 31-50, identifying and filtering (i.e. selecting) possible problem/error sources in the communication network based on trigger threshold of multiple trigger thresholds exceeds or met by level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to implement US 9,935,857 B1 because it was notoriously well known to provide a method and/or system for use with a system that includes a plurality of SIP servers that are configured and arranged to provide services for a respective set of endpoints and detect potential problem sources for the connectivity problems.
Nonetheless, the removal of said limitation from claim 1 of the current application made these claim as a broader version of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2. Therefore, since omission of an element and its function in a combination is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same functions as before (In re Karlson (CCPA) 136 USPQ 184 (1963)), claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,223,945 B2 and claim 1 of the current application is not patentably distinct from each other.
F) Claims 16-18 of instant application correspond to claims 26, 27, and 29 of allowed U.S. patent 11,223,945 B2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
A) Claims 1, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US 2011/0093584 A1) in view of Irwin (US 2017/0177808 A1).
As per claim 1, Qiu teaches a method comprising: determining, by a computing device, a quantity of registration requests received by a server (Fig.2 and ¶0028 and ¶0031, determining by the UE (i.e. computing device) threshold rate of registration requests received by NGN core (i.e. server, ¶0002)); comparing, by the computing device, the quantity with a plurality of thresholds (Fig.2 and ¶0031, comparing the query rate with a threshold rate), wherein the plurality comprises: a first threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. first threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the first threshold is associated with a first error source location (¶0024 and ¶0032, threshold rates associated with catastrophic failure (i.e. a first error source location)); and a second threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. second threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the second threshold comprises less registration requests than the first threshold, and is associated with a second error source location (¶0024 and ¶0031-32, threshold rates much lower than any threshold rate used by the load balancer in providing overload protection (i.e. a second error source location)).
However, Qiu does not explicitly teach selecting one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity; and sending a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network.
In the same field of endeavor, Irwin teaches selecting one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity (¶0076 and ¶0397, selecting alert format configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request (i.e. possible source of error) that the value exceeds the threshold limit); and sending a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network (¶0076 and ¶0397, executing to transmit or send alert indicating the selected alert format which configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request; also see ¶0292, an error message generated based on the amount of funds from the confirmation not matching the expected credit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Irwin into invention of Qiu in order to determine allocation of resources among electronic accounts based on predicted resource consumption over a time interval to improve excessive server-client requests and responses, processing delays, increase bandwidth usage, or erroneous or inefficient resource allocation.
As per claim 8, Qiu teaches an apparatus (¶0021, computer 110 (i.e. apparatus) comprising: one or more processors (¶0021, processor); and memory storing instructions that (¶0021, memory storing instructions), when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
determine a quantity of registration requests received by a server (Fig.2 and ¶0028 and ¶0031, determining threshold rate of registration requests received by NGN core (i.e. server, ¶0002)); comparing, the quantity with a plurality of thresholds (Fig.2 and ¶0031, comparing the query rate with a threshold rate), wherein the plurality comprises: a first threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. first threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the first threshold is associated with a first error source location (¶0024 and ¶0032, threshold rates associated with catastrophic failure (i.e. a first error source location)); and a second threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. second threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the second threshold comprises less registration requests than the first threshold, and is associated with a second error source location (¶0024 and ¶0031-32, threshold rates much lower than any threshold rate used by the load balancer in providing overload protection (i.e. a second error source location)).
However, Qiu does not explicitly teach select one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity; and send a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network.
In the same field of endeavor, Irwin teaches select one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity (¶0076 and ¶0397, selecting alert format configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request (i.e. possible source of error) that the value exceeds the threshold limit); and send a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network (¶0076 and ¶0397, executing to transmit or send alert indicating the selected alert format which configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request; also see ¶0292, an error message generated based on the amount of funds from the confirmation not matching the expected credit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Irwin into invention of Qiu in order to determine allocation of resources among electronic accounts based on predicted resource consumption over a time interval to improve excessive server-client requests and responses, processing delays, increase bandwidth usage, or erroneous or inefficient resource allocation.
As per claim 15, Qiu teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed (¶0021, computer readable media storing instruction), cause: determining, a quantity of registration requests received by a server (Fig.2 and ¶0028 and ¶0031, determining threshold rate of registration requests received by NGN core (i.e. server, ¶0002)); comparing, the quantity with a plurality of thresholds (Fig.2 and ¶0031, comparing the query rate with a threshold rate), wherein the plurality comprises: a first threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. first threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the first threshold is associated with a first error source location (¶0024 and ¶0032, threshold rates associated with catastrophic failure (i.e. a first error source location)); and a second threshold of expected registration requests (¶0031-32, threshold rates (i.e. second threshold) of predictable registration requests), wherein the second threshold comprises less registration requests than the first threshold, and is associated with a second error source location (¶0024 and ¶0031-32, threshold rates much lower than any threshold rate used by the load balancer in providing overload protection (i.e. a second error source location)).
However, Qiu does not explicitly teach selecting one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity; and sending a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network.
In the same field of endeavor, Irwin teaches selecting one of two possible sources of error in a communication network based on which threshold, of the plurality of thresholds is met by the quantity (¶0076 and ¶0397, selecting alert format configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request (i.e. possible source of error) that the value exceeds the threshold limit); and sending a network alert indicating the selected source of error as a source of error in the communication network (¶0076 and ¶0397, executing to transmit or send alert indicating the selected alert format which configured for an interface corresponding to the first electronic funding source indicating a denial of the single electronic benefits account transaction request; also see ¶0292, an error message generated based on the amount of funds from the confirmation not matching the expected credit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Irwin into invention of Qiu in order to determine allocation of resources among electronic accounts based on predicted resource consumption over a time interval to improve excessive server-client requests and responses, processing delays, increase bandwidth usage, or erroneous or inefficient resource allocation.
B) Claims 2-5, 7, 9-12, 14, 16-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US 2011/0093584 A1) in view of Irwin (US 2017/0177808 A1) and further in view of Breau (US 8391208 B1).
As per claim 2 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach, wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 31-40, number of registration requests going above predefined threshold then the higher peak value (i.e. upper boundary) and when number of registration requests going below predefined threshold then lower peak value (i.e. lower boundary)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 3 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach storing a registration history comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server; and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches storing a registration history (Breau, Col.4, lines 6-11, storing registration history) comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, predefined or expected number of registrations requests comprises determining a history of number of registrations requests received by home agent); and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, the threshold(s) of the predefined or expected number of registration request based on history number of registration requests received by the home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 4 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.7, lines 42-57, determining based on re-registration duration or period within the time length (i.e. every 60 mins) the predicted number of registration requests received by home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 5 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server, and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server (Breau, Col.3, lines 5-8, number or quantity of electronic devices request registration with home agent), and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval (Breau, Col.8, lines 38-49 and Col.5 lines 31-40, lines , percent or ratio between peak value of registration lifetime of re-registration period over period of time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 7 as applied to claim 1 above, Breau further teaches wherein: the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during time interval, and the second the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during a second time interval (Breau, Col.3, lines 22-31, home agent may smooth and spread peaks of registration requests (i.e. first, second, or more) by varying the duration of the registration lifetime returned in the registration reply message during peak registration periods. The home agent may analyze current registration request loads and system resource availability periodically, for example every 10 mS, every 100 mS, or some other period, to determine the registration lifetimes rather than performing this analysis during every registration request. Alternatively, the home agent may perform this analysis every 10 registration requests, every 100 registration requests, or some other number of registration requests).
As per claim 9 as applied to claim 8 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach, wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 31-40, number of registration requests going above predefined threshold then the higher peak value (i.e. upper boundary) and when number of registration requests going below predefined threshold then lower peak value (i.e. lower boundary)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 10 as applied to claim 8 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach storing a registration history comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server; and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches storing a registration history (Breau, Col.4, lines 6-11, storing registration history) comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, predefined or expected number of registrations requests comprises determining a history of number of registrations requests received by home agent); and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, the threshold(s) of the predefined or expected number of registration request based on history number of registration requests received by the home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 11 as applied to claim 8 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.7, lines 42-57, determining based on re-registration duration or period within the time length (i.e. every 60 mins) the predicted number of registration requests received by home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 12 as applied to claim 8 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server, and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server (Breau, Col.3, lines 5-8, number or quantity of electronic devices request registration with home agent), and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval (Breau, Col.8, lines 38-49 and Col.5 lines 31-40, lines , percent or ratio between peak value of registration lifetime of re-registration period over period of time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 14 as applied to claim 8 above, Breau further teaches wherein: the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during time interval, and the second the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during a second time interval (Breau, Col.3, lines 22-31, home agent may smooth and spread peaks of registration requests (i.e. first, second, or more) by varying the duration of the registration lifetime returned in the registration reply message during peak registration periods. The home agent may analyze current registration request loads and system resource availability periodically, for example every 10 mS, every 100 mS, or some other period, to determine the registration lifetimes rather than performing this analysis during every registration request. Alternatively, the home agent may perform this analysis every 10 registration requests, every 100 registration requests, or some other number of registration requests).
As per claim 16 as applied to claim 15 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach, wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches wherein the first threshold is an upper boundary of a range of an expected quantity of registration requests and the second threshold is a lower boundary of the range of the expected quantity of registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 31-40, number of registration requests going above predefined threshold then the higher peak value (i.e. upper boundary) and when number of registration requests going below predefined threshold then lower peak value (i.e. lower boundary)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 17 as applied to claim 15 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach storing a registration history comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server; and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches storing a registration history (Breau, Col.4, lines 6-11, storing registration history) comprising a historical quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, predefined or expected number of registrations requests comprises determining a history of number of registrations requests received by home agent); and determining, based on the registration history, the first threshold of expected registration requests and the second threshold of expected registration requests (Breau, Col.5, lines 56-65, the threshold(s) of the predefined or expected number of registration request based on history number of registration requests received by the home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 18 as applied to claim 15 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches determining, based on a re-registration period within a time interval, an expected quantity of registration requests received by the server (Breau, Col.7, lines 42-57, determining based on re-registration duration or period within the time length (i.e. every 60 mins) the predicted number of registration requests received by home agent).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 19 as applied to claim 15 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server, and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval.
In the same field of endeavor, Breau teaches a quantity of terminals registered with a network associated with the server (Breau, Col.3, lines 5-8, number or quantity of electronic devices request registration with home agent), and a ratio between an upper boundary and a lower boundary of a re-registration period within a time interval (Breau, Col.8, lines 38-49 and Col.5 lines 31-40, lines , percent or ratio between peak value of registration lifetime of re-registration period over period of time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Breau into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order for automatically managing mobile Internet Protocol re-registration to allow the mobile device to stay seamlessly connected to the Internet.
As per claim 21 as applied to claim 15 above, Breau further teaches wherein: the count of the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during time interval, and the second the count of the quantity of registration requests is received by the server during a second time interval (Breau, Col.3, lines 22-31, home agent may smooth and spread peaks of registration requests (i.e. first, second, or more) by varying the duration of the registration lifetime returned in the registration reply message during peak registration periods. The home agent may analyze current registration request loads and system resource availability periodically, for example every 10 mS, every 100 mS, or some other period, to determine the registration lifetimes rather than performing this analysis during every registration request. Alternatively, the home agent may perform this analysis every 10 registration requests, every 100 registration requests, or some other number of registration requests).
As per claim 22 as applied to claim 1 above, Breau further teaches wherein sending the network alert indicating a first device as the source of error if the quantity is above the first threshold; or sending the network alert indicating a second device as the source of error if the quantity is below the second threshold (Breau, Col.5, lines 31-40, number of registration requests going above predefined threshold (i.e. first threshold) and when number of registration requests going below predefined threshold (i.e. second threshold)).
C) Claims 6, 13, 20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qiu (US 2011/0093584 A1) in view of Irwin (US 2017/0177808 A1) and further in view of Bellam (US 2020/0195729 A1).
As per claim 6 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Bellam teaches wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server (Bellam, ¶0035, errors classified by source of errors such as network issues, server error, etc.; therefore, first source of error could be server and second source of error could be network access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Bellam into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order to diagnose issues arising on user equipment (UE), including issues caused by web-based applications to track the problem and identify the cause of error (Bellam, background).
As per claim 13 as applied to claim 8 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Bellam teaches wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server (Bellam, ¶0035, errors classified by source of errors such as network issues, server error, etc.; therefore, first source of error could be server and second source of error could be network access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Bellam into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order to diagnose issues arising on user equipment (UE), including issues caused by web-based applications to track the problem and identify the cause of error (Bellam, background).
As per claim 20 as applied to claim 15 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server.
In the same field of endeavor, Bellam teaches wherein the first error source location is the server and wherein the second error source location is an intervening access network via which the registration requests are received by the server (Bellam, ¶0035, errors classified by source of errors such as network issues, server error, etc.; therefore, first source of error could be server and second source of error could be network access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Bellam into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order to diagnose issues arising on user equipment (UE), including issues caused by web-based applications to track the problem and identify the cause of error (Bellam, background).
As per claim 23 as applied to claim 1 above, Qiu in view of Irwin does not explicitly teach sending, to the selected source of error, a message confirming the source of error; and receiving, from the selected source of error, a confirmation of the source of error, wherein sending of the network alert is based on the confirmation.
In the same field of endeavor, Bellam teaches sending, to the selected source of error, a message confirming the source of error; and receiving, from the selected source of error, a confirmation of the source of error, wherein sending of the network alert is based on the confirmation (Bellam, ¶0035, sending response message including the source of detected error and receiving source of error and check the source of detected error based on the error codes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teaching of Bellam into invention of Qiu and Irwin in order to diagnose issues arising on user equipment (UE), including issues caused by web-based applications to track the problem and identify the cause of error (Bellam, background).
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIDEH MADANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1249. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 9 AM to 5 PM EST.
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, JINSONG HU can be reached at 5712723965. 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.
/FARIDEH MADANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2643
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights