DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The examiner has taken notice that claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 have been amended and clams 1-10 are currently pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, filed on 07/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 5, 8 and 9 under 102(a)(1) and 7 and 10 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Luft.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuzuki (US 2015/0341820; hereinafter Kikuzuki) in view of Luft et al. (US 20120329442).
Regarding claim 1, Kikuzuki teaches a relay device provided in a moving body and configured to communicate with a plurality of communication devices present at different locations in a wireless manner (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Paragraphs [0034]; [0040]; [0041] discloses a relay device that is provided in a moving body (worn on a human body) and configured to communicate with multiple communication devices located at different positions),
the relay device comprising: a processor; and a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor, perform to: receive a signal transmitted from each of the plurality of communication devices (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065] disclose that the communication devices include a control unit (processor) and a storage unit with computer programs. Paragraphs [0047]; [0055] describes relay devices receiving signals (help signals) from multiple other communication devices);
measure a degree of congestion of communication in the receiving (Paragraph [0047] describes measuring congestion by counting the number of received help signals, which directly indicates the number of devices contending for relay service. Paragraph [0078] this paragraph details the specific process of counting signals to determine the number of requesting candidates, which is a measure of congestion. Paragraphs [0098]-[0099] refers to detecting congestion during the help period, and describes an alternative method of measuring congestion by detecting signal interference when the RSSI is high but the signal cannot be properly decoded, indicating multiple simultaneous transmissions);
and transmit information to each communication device when the relay device is located in a range in which the relay device is able to communicate with the communication device (Paragraphs [0041]; [0048];[0067]; [0070]; [0079] discloses that the relay device (like device 2-1 or 2-3) transmits information (such as a poll signal) to each communication device that is within its communication range meaning, devices can physically reach via wireless signals),
the information being used to determine the number of times of transmission of the signal to be transmitted from the communication device and being based on the degree of congestion (Paragraphs [0048]-[0050] describes counting help signals as “number of requesting candidates” and transmitting this value in a poll signal. Paragraph [0075] describes the transmission probability equals “the reciprocal; of the number of requesting candidates, more congestion produces lower probability. Paragraphs [0101]-[0103] describes transmitting congestion-based information that determines transmission probability, controlling the number of transmission attempts),
Kikuzuki doesn’t teach wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range.
However, in analogous art Luft teaches wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range (Paragraph [0112] describes that the relay station monitors the number of PRACH 252 access… within a given period of time”, which is the uplink access count from multiple user equipment devices. Paragraph [0113] further explains that the system defines “first value… and a lower second value” for the threshold number of access attempts per unit time depending on the prevailing network load, thereby establishing a predetermined threshold range used to evaluate congestion levels. In addition, Paragraph[0126] teaches that the relay station may “alternatively…actively monitor” uplink signal parameters, such as waiting for “PRACH 252…preambles to drop below a minimum acceptable threshold”. Paragraph [0130] describes that the relay assesses the “number of update requests per unit time” and grades the resulting congestion as high, medium, or low congestion threat, with progressively greater or less blocking” applied depending on the assessed level, thereby disclosing information that indicates a level).
Kikuzuki and Luft are all considered analogous to the claimed invention as they pertain to the same field of wireless network congestion management and mobile device communication coordination in cellular networks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Kikuzuki method of determining the number of requesting candidates by counting received help signals and transmitting poll signals containing this number to control transmission probability with Luft’s approach of using predetermined threshold ranges to determine progressive congestion levels and broadcasting corresponding congestion event to manage the processing burden on the network (Luft, Paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 2, Kikuzuki in view of Luft, Luft teaches wherein the information based on the degree of congestion is information indicating the number of accesses of the signal per unit time in the receiving, information indicating a received signal intensity of the signal, or information indicating the number of times of transmission (Paragraph [0112]; [0126]-[0127]; [0130] describes that the information based on the degree of congestion indicate the number of uplink access attempts, received signal intensity, or transmission frequency).
Regarding claim 5, Kikuzuki teaches a wireless communication system comprising: a plurality of communication devices present at different locations (Paragraph [0039] disclose multiple communication devices located at different positions);
and a relay device provided in a moving body and configured to communicate with the plurality of communication devices in a wireless manner (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Paragraphs [0034]; [0040]; [0041] discloses a relay device that is provided in a moving body (worn on a human body) and configured to communicate with multiple communication devices),
wherein the relay device comprising: a processor; and a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program Instructions, when executed by the processor, perform to: receive a signal transmitted from each of the plurality of communication devices (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065] discloses that the communication devices include a control unit (processor) and a storage unit with computer programs. Paragraphs [0047]; [0055] describes relay devices receiving signals (help signals) from multiple other communication devices),
measure a degree of congestion of communication in the receiving (Paragraph [0047] describes measuring congestion by counting the number of received help signals, which directly indicates the number of devices contending for relay service. Paragraph [0078] this paragraph details the specific process of counting signals to determine the number of requesting candidates, which is a measure of congestion. Paragraphs [0098]-[0099] refers to detecting congestion during the help period, and describes an alternative method of measuring congestion by detecting signal interference when the RSSI is high but the signal cannot be properly decoded, indicating multiple simultaneous transmissions),
and transmit congestion degree information based on the degree of congestion to each communication device when the relay device is located in a range in which the relay device is able to communicate with the communication device (Paragraph [0041] addresses the range limitation, explaining that connections depend on the distance and positioning between devices, confirming that communication only occurs when devices are within range of each other. Paragraph [0048] states that the relay devices transmit poll signals that contain congestion information (number of requesting candidates) to requesting communication devices. Paragraph [0051] details the structure of the poll signal, confirming that it contains the number of requesting candidates (congestion degree information). Paragraph [0070] disclose that the poll signal containing congestion information is generated based on the measured degree of congestion (the number of help signals received). Paragraph [0079] describes the process of creating and transmitting the poll signal containing congestion information),
and each communication device comprising: a processor; and a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065] disclose that each communication device includes processors),
wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor, perform to: receive the congestion degree information, and transmit the signal to the relay device the number of times of transmission determined based on the congestion degree information (Paragraph [0049] describes receiving congestion information (number of requesting candidates) and using it to determine transmission. Paragraph [0073] describes extracting and storing the congestion information from received poll signals. Paragraphs [0075]; [0084]; [0102] discloses that the transmission probability directly controls whether and how many times a signal is transmitted. When the probability is low (due to high congestion), fewer transmissions will occur statistically. When the probability is high (due to low congestion), more transmissions will occur. This mechanism effectively determines “the number of times of transmission” based on the congestion information).
Kikuzuki doesn’t teach wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range.
However, in analogous art Luft teaches wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range (Paragraph [0112] describes that the relay station monitors the number of PRACH 252 access… within a given period of time”, which is the uplink access count from multiple user equipment devices. Paragraph [0113] further explains that the system defines “first value… and a lower second value” for the threshold number of access attempts per unit time depending on the prevailing network load, thereby establishing a predetermined threshold range used to evaluate congestion levels. In addition, Paragraph[0126] teaches that the relay station may “alternatively…actively monitor” uplink signal parameters, such as waiting for “PRACH 252…preambles to drop below a minimum acceptable threshold”. Paragraph [0130] describes that the relay assesses the “number of update requests per unit time” and grades the resulting congestion as high, medium, or low congestion threat, with progressively greater or less blocking” applied depending on the assessed level, thereby disclosing information that indicates a level).
Regarding claim 6, Kikuzuki in view of Luft, Kikuzuki teaches further comprising: a base station device configured to communicate with the relay device in a wireless manner (Paragraphs [0039];[0040]-[0041] describes wireless communication between the relay device and the base station),
wherein the relay device transmits, to the base station device, a signal based on the signal transmitted from each of the plurality of communication devices when the relay device is located in a range in which the relay device is able to communicate with the base station device (Paragraphs [0041];[0079] disclose that the relay devices transmitting signals received from other communication devices to the base station).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1 respectively.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuzuki in view of Luft in further view of Cooper et al. (US 2019/0103913; hereinafter Cooper).
Regarding claim 3, Kikuzuki and Luft doesn’t teach wherein the relay device is provided in the moving body configured to orbit around the Earth and wherein the computer program instructions further perform to; transmit the information based on the degree of congestion measured in a previous orbit to the communication device.
However, in analogous art Cooper discloses wherein the relay device is provided in the moving body configured to orbit around the Earth (Paragraphs [0029]- [0030]; Fig. 2 shows satellite 220 in orbit, which serves as the relay device for communications between terminals 210 and ground station 230),
and wherein the computer program instructions further perform to; transmit the information based on the degree of congestion measured in a previous orbit to the communication device (Paragraphs [0060]; [0094] disclose using historical information about communication patterns to predict congestion at certain times, which would include historical data from previous cycles).
Kikuzuki, Luft and Cooper are both regarded as analogs to the claimed invention because they operate within the same field of wireless communication systems that utilize relay devices and congestion mitigation techniques to manage communication efficiency between multiple communication nodes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Kikuzuki and Luft by incorporating Cooper’s method of enforcing communication restrictions on a utilized return communication path based on congestion levels to reduce the likelihood of transmission failure and mitigate overall system congestion (Cooper, Paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 4, Kikuzuki and Luft doesn’t teach wherein the moving body is a low earth orbit satellite, the communication device is provided in an IoT terminal, and the signal is a signal indicating sensor data measured by the IoT terminal.
However, in analogous art Cooper discloses wherein the moving body is a low earth orbit satellite (Paragraph [0029] states that low-earth orbit satellites may be used as alternatives to geostationary satellites in the disclosed communication system),
the communication device is provided in an IoT terminal (Paragraph [0031] shows that the terminals 210 (communication devices) can be implemented as IoT sensors or actuators), and the signal is a signal indicating sensor data measured by the IoT terminal (Paragraphs [0031]; [0068] disclose that when the terminals are implemented as IoT sensors and the “information messages” would naturally include sensor data measured by these IoT terminals).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Kikuzuki and Luft into the combination of Cooper for the same reason as claim 3 above.
Claim(s) 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuzuki in view of Luft in further view of Uchiyama et al. (US 2020/0296795; hereinafter Uchiyama).
Regarding claim 7, Kikuzuki teaches a wireless communication system comprising: a plurality of communication devices present at different locations (Paragraph [0039] disclose multiple communication devices located at different positions);
and a plurality of relay devices configured to communicate with the plurality of communication devices in a wireless manner, each relay device being provided in a corresponding one of a plurality of moving bodies (Paragraph [0041] multiple devices can function as relay device. Paragraph [0047] describe multiple devices operating as connecting communication devices (relay devices). Paragraph [0040] describes the communication devices (including those functioning as relay devices) being worn on human bodies (moving bodies)),
wherein each relay device comprising: a processor; and a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor, perform to: receive a signal transmitted from each of the plurality of communication devices (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065] discloses that the communication devices include a control unit (processor) and a storage unit with computer programs. Paragraphs [0047]; [0055] describes relay devices receiving signals (help signals) from multiple other communication devices),
measure a degree of congestion of communication in the receiving (Paragraph [0047] describes measuring congestion by counting the number of received help signals, which directly indicates the number of devices contending for relay service. Paragraph [0078] this paragraph details the specific process of counting signals to determine the number of requesting candidates, which is a measure of congestion. Paragraphs [0098]-[0099] refers to detecting congestion during the help period, and describes an alternative method of measuring congestion by detecting signal interference when the RSSI is high but the signal cannot be properly decoded, indicating multiple simultaneous transmissions),
and transmit congestion degree information based on the degree of congestion to each communication device when the relay device is located in a range in which the relay device is able to communicate with the communication device (Paragraph [0041] addresses the range limitation, explaining that connections depend on the distance and positioning between devices, confirming that communication only occurs when devices are within range of each other. Paragraph [0048] states that the relay devices transmit poll signals that contain congestion information (number of requesting candidates) to requesting communication devices. Paragraph [0051] details the structure of the poll signal, confirming that it contains the number of requesting candidates (congestion degree information). Paragraph [0070] disclose that the poll signal containing congestion information is generated based on the measured degree of congestion (the number of help signals received). Paragraph [0079] describes the process of creating and transmitting the poll signal containing congestion information),
and each communication device comprising: a processor; and a storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065] disclose that each communication device includes processors),
wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by the processor, perform to: receive the congestion degree information, and transmit, to the relay device that has transmitted the congestion degree information, the signal the number of times of transmission determined based on the congestion degree information (Paragraph [0049] describes receiving congestion information (number of requesting candidates) and using it to determine transmission. Paragraph [0073] describes extracting and storing the congestion information from received poll signals. Paragraphs [0075]; [0084]; [0102] discloses that the transmission probability directly controls whether and how many times a signal is transmitted. When the probability is low (due to high congestion), fewer transmissions will occur statistically. When the probability is high (due to low congestion), more transmissions will occur. This mechanism effectively determines “the number of times of transmission” based on the congestion information).
Kikuzuki discloses transmitting congestion information when in range, but doesn't explicitly state in a case where the measured degree of congestion is relatively low among the degrees of congestion measured in the plurality of relay devices.
However, in analogous art Uchiyama disclose in a case where the measured degree of congestion is relatively low among the degrees of congestion measured in the plurality of relay devices (Paragraphs [0225]-[0226] disclose that a relay device may proceed to communicate only if it is in an appropriate location and if its congestion level is relatively low compared to others (implicitly, if multiple relay devices are evaluated, only the least congested one would act).
Kikuzuki and Uchiyama doesn’t teach wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range.
However, in analogous art Luft teaches wherein the information indicates a level determined based on whether or not the number of accesses of uplink communication per unit time from the plurality of communication devices or a received signal intensity in a frequency band of the uplink communication is within a predetermined threshold range (Paragraph [0112] describes that the relay station monitors the number of PRACH 252 access… within a given period of time”, which is the uplink access count from multiple user equipment devices. Paragraph [0113] further explains that the system defines “first value… and a lower second value” for the threshold number of access attempts per unit time depending on the prevailing network load, thereby establishing a predetermined threshold range used to evaluate congestion levels. In addition, Paragraph[0126] teaches that the relay station may “alternatively…actively monitor” uplink signal parameters, such as waiting for “PRACH 252…preambles to drop below a minimum acceptable threshold”. Paragraph [0130] describes that the relay assesses the “number of update requests per unit time” and grades the resulting congestion as high, medium, or low congestion threat, with progressively greater or less blocking” applied depending on the assessed level, thereby disclosing information that indicates a level).
Kikuzuki, Uchiyama and Luft are regarded as analogs to the claimed invention because they operate within the same field of wireless communication systems involving congestion-aware relay communication among mobile or distributed communication devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Kikuzuki by incorporating Uchiyama’s method of conditionally performing relay communication based on a measured congestion level and geographic eligibility with Luft’s approach of using predetermined threshold ranges to determine progressive congestion levels and broadcasting corresponding congestion event to manage the processing burden on the network (Luft, Paragraph [0003]).
Claim 10 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7 respectively.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHERET WOLDEGEBREAL KIDANE whose telephone number is (571)270-3642. The examiner can normally be reached M-F8:30-5.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/M.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/RICKY Q NGO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights