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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/27/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-9, 12, 14, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amimi (US 20170135018) in view of Pandey (US 20210120438) further in view of Wei (US 20230014083).
Regarding claim 1 and 12, Amimi teaches a system comprising:
a plurality of access point (AP) devices (Fig.1 Mesh Points, Main AP 112a, Mesh Point/AP 112b and Mesh Point/AP 112c) configured to provide a wireless network at a site; and
a network management system ([0037] “the network controller can decide, for example, with which mesh point each client should associate, when a client should roam, which topology the network should be using, with which band should the client associate, which band should be used for the traffic forwarding, and where to install a new mesh point to provide more coverage in the target area”) comprising:
a memory (1211 memory; Fig. 2) and
one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to ([0049] “The processor(s) 1210 control the overall operation of the computing device 1200... Memory 1211 may store data and instructions that configure the processor(s) 1210 to execute operations in accordance with the techniques described above.);
determine, based on network data collected by a plurality of client devices associated with the wireless network or the plurality of AP devices ([0049] “Memory 1211 may store data. ([0100] flow chart 2100 illustrated in FIG. 21, an example method for performing roaming decision in a mesh network. The method can be implemented and performed by a controlling entity of the mesh network in conjunction with the software application that runs on the user device (e.g., device 130a) and the mesh points). [0102] “A number of embodiments can determine when roaming is to take place based on information gathered from both the mesh point that the client is currently associated with and the mesh point(s) that the client is not currently associated with”);
one or more roaming quality assessments for each of a plurality of roaming events in the wireless network, wherein the one or more roaming quality assessments include a suboptimal roam score (link quality is deemed insufficient) for each of the plurality of roaming events based on a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) before a corresponding roaming event ([0100] “the disclosed wireless mesh network can measure one or more parameters in addition to the RSSI value to better determine when and how to roam a client”; ([0102] Roaming of the particular client to another mesh point can take place, for example, when the existing link quality is deemed insufficient and it is estimated that there exist a better link for the client to connect (Step 2104). The better link may be a different mesh point, or it may be a different band on same mesh point. Because it is observed that a single sample of RSSI value may not be an accurate measurement (e.g., because of multi-path fading), one or more embodiments are to average RSSI values over packets.)
Amimi does not explicitly teach “identify, based on the one or more roaming assessments, an anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network determine, based on identifying the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network, a root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network and perform a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network”. For compact prosecution purpose,
Pandey is added to show the explicit teaching.
In an analogous art, Pandey teaches:
identify, based on the one or more roaming assessments, an anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network (Fig. 8 Step 810; [0082] “to step 810, where, as described in greater detail above, the network assurance service may identify a set of wireless network anomalies detected in the wireless network that are associated with a set of one or more network measurements. In various embodiments, the anomalies may be indicative of wireless roaming failures (e.g., the inability of a client to transition from one AP to another)” “[0075] “wireless anomaly detector 406 may assess measurement data collected from the network... to detect wireless anomalies in the network. These wireless anomalies may include roaming/onboarding failures... (e.g., observed degradation of the wireless throughput). In some embodiments, wireless anomaly detector 406 may detect wireless anomalies based on a set of predefined rules... In further embodiments, wireless anomaly detector 406 may use machine learning-based anomaly detection, to detect wireless anomalies.”)
determine, based on identifying the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network, a root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network ((“[0073] “Identification and root cause analysis of wireless anomalies, such as roaming/onboarding failures and throughput degradation, that are due to RF/radio-based issues” [0051] Cognitive Analytics Model(s): The aim of cognitive analytics is to find behavioral patterns in complex and unstructured datasets. For the sake of illustration, analyzer 312 may be able to extract patterns of Wi-Fi roaming in the network and roaming behaviors (e.g., the “stickiness” of clients to APs 320, 328, “ping-pong” clients, the number of visited APs 320, 328, roaming triggers, etc).) and
perform a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network ([0052] “cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs”; [0056] Cloud service 302 may also include output and visualization interface 318 configured to... data indicative of the state of the monitored network, current or predicted issues in the network... insights or suggestions regarding a given condition or issue in the network... interface 318 may receive an instruction or other indication to adjust/retrain one of the models of analyzer 312 from interface 31 [0127] At step 820, the network assurance service may determine, when the set of wireless anomalies are classified as radio-related, that the wireless anomalies are recurring for a particular wireless access point in the network [0128] At step 825, as detailed above, the network assurance service may initiate a change to the wireless network in part to move clients in the wireless network from the particular wireless access point to another wireless access point in the network...the other wireless access point may be a new AP selected by the service for deployment to the network. In further embodiments, the other wireless access point may be a neighbor of the particular access point that could potentially absorb some of its clients. The service may initiate the change by either acting automatically or, in further embodiments, by sending data to a user interface indicative of the change, to allow a network administrator to assess and implement the change.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi's teaching of evaluating roaming quality to also include Pandey's teaching of identifying anomaly based on the evaluation and performing a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance to increase the chance of success and reduce failure in the roaming process.
Pandey implicitly but not explicitly teach determine an RSSI after completion of the corresponding roaming event ([0127] “At step 820, the network assurance service may determine, when the set of wireless anomalies are classified as radio-related, that the wireless anomalies are recurring for a particular wireless access point in the network”. The examiner notes that recurring radio-related (roaming) anomalies means the RSSI/radio related has to repeated and evaluated before and after the first roaming event”). Nonetheless, to expedited prosecution, Wei is added to show the explicit teaching determine an RSSI after completion of the corresponding roaming event.
In an analogous art, Wei teaches determine an RSSI (signal quality) after completion of the corresponding roaming event ([0042] “The roaming experience indication information is used to indicate whether signal quality is improved after a terminal associated with the first access point device roams to a destination access point device corresponding to a corresponding historical roaming record”; [0232] “The access control device selects, based on the roaming experience indication information that corresponds to each historical roaming record and from the plurality of historical roaming records, a historical roaming record that signal quality is improved after roaming”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amini's teaching of quality assessment along with Pandey’s teaching of performing a remedial action to include Wei's teaching of determining an RSSI after completion of the corresponding roaming event in order to determine if the roaming event resulted in improved performance.
Regarding claim 3 and 14, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, wherein the RSSI associated with the roaming event is a first RSSI of a first wireless signal received from a first AP with which the client device is associated before the corresponding roaming event (Amimi “[0102] A number of embodiments can determine when roaming is to take place based on information gathered from both the mesh point that the client is currently associated with and the mesh point(s) that the client is not currently associated with. Roaming of the particular client to another mesh point can take place, for example, when the existing link quality is deemed insufficient and it is estimated that there exists a better link for the client to connect (Amimi Step 2104)”).
Regarding claim 6, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, wherein to perform the remedial action, the one or more the processors are further configured to identify anomalous operation of the wireless network based on the one or more roaming quality assessments (Pandey ([0052] “cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs“; [0127] At step 820, the network assurance service may determine, when the set of wireless anomalies are classified as radio-related, that the wireless anomalies are recurring for a particular wireless access point in the network [0128] At step 825, as detailed above, the network assurance service may initiate a change to the wireless network in part to move clients in the wireless network from the particular wireless access point to another wireless access point in the network...the other wireless access point may be a new AP selected by the service for deployment to the network. In further embodiments, the other wireless access point may be a neighbor of the particular access point that could potentially absorb some of its clients. The service may initiate the change by either acting automatically or, in further embodiments, by sending data to a user interface indicative of the change, to allow a network administrator to assess and implement the change.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi's teaching of evaluating roaming quality to also include Pandey's teaching of identifying anomaly based on the evaluation and performing a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance along with Wei’s teaching to increase the chance of success and reduce failure in the roaming process.
Regarding claim 7, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 6, wherein to perform the remedial action, the one or more the processors are further configured to automatically invoke at least one remedial action to address the anomalous operation of the wireless network, wherein the remedial action includes reconfiguring operation of at least one of the plurality of APs in the wireless network (Pandey ([0052] “cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs“; [0127] At step 820, the network assurance service may determine, when the set of wireless anomalies are classified as radio-related, that the wireless anomalies are recurring for a particular wireless access point in the network [0128] At step 825, as detailed above, the network assurance service may initiate a change to the wireless network in part to move clients in the wireless network from the particular wireless access point to another wireless access point in the network...the other wireless access point may be a new AP selected by the service for deployment to the network. In further embodiments, the other wireless access point may be a neighbor of the particular access point that could potentially absorb some of its clients. The service may initiate the change by either acting automatically or, in further embodiments, by sending data to a user interface indicative of the change, to allow a network administrator to assess and implement the change.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi's teaching of assessing roaming quality to include Pandey's teaching of performing a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance along with Wei’s teaching to increase the chance of success and reduce failure in the roaming process.
Regarding claim 8, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, wherein to identify the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network, the one or more the processors are further configured to classify, based on a trained machine learning model and the one or more roaming quality assessments, operation of the wireless network as one of normal operation or anomalous operation (Pandey, “[0075] “wireless anomaly detector 406 may assess measurement data collected from the network.. to detect wireless anomalies in the network. These wireless anomalies may include roaming/onboarding failures... (e.g., observed degradation of the wireless throughput). In some embodiments, wireless anomaly detector 406 may detect wireless anomalies based on a set of predefined rules... In further embodiments, wireless anomaly detector 406 may use machine learning-based anomaly detection, to detect wireless anomalies.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi's teaching of evaluating roaming quality along with Wei’s teaching to also include Pandey's teaching of identifying anomaly based on the evaluation and performing a remedial action to address the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance to increase the chance of success and reduce failure in the roaming process.
Regarding claim 9, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, wherein to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments, the one or more processors are further configured to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments further include an interband score (Amimi 2.4G and 5G) for each of the plurality of client devices based on an RSSI delta associated with each of a plurality of interband roaming events (Amimi [0088] “(Step 2034). Measurements can be taken on both transmitting and receiving ends, and on all the available frequency bands (Amimi e.g., 2.4G and 5G). The measurement on the data transmitted to the device can generate RSSI values and RX rate for the device under the specific attenuation (Step 2036).”).
Regarding claim 16, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the method of claim 12, wherein performing the remedial action comprises at least one of: generating a notification indicative of the root cause of the anomalous operation in roaming performance of the wireless network and a recommendation of at least one remedial action to address the anomalous operation of the wireless network; or automatically invoking at least one remedial action to address the anomalous operation of the wireless network, wherein the remedial action includes reconfiguring operation of at least one of the plurality of APs in the wireless network (Pandey [0056] “Cloud service 302 may also include output and visualization interface 318 configured to provide sensory data to a network administrator or other user via one or more user interface devices .. current or predicted issues in the network (e.g., the violation of a defined rule, etc.), insights or suggestions regarding a given condition or issue in the network”; “[0130] “The techniques described herein, therefore, allow a network assurance service that monitors a wireless network to identify the parts of the network where onboarding failures and/or throughput anomalies are occurring, specifically due to RF reasons. In further aspects, the techniques herein can be used to recommend the deployment of additional APs to the network, to mitigate the situation, or make other changes to the network, accordingly”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi's teaching of evaluating roaming quality to also include Pandey's teaching of a recommendation to the problem along with Wei’s teaching to mitigate the problem as taught by Pandey (“[0130] “The techniques described herein, therefore, allow a network assurance service that monitors a wireless network to identify the parts of the network where onboarding failures and/or throughput anomalies are occurring, specifically due to RF reasons. In further aspects, the techniques herein can be used to recommend the deployment of additional APs to the network, to mitigate the situation”).
Regarding claim 17, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the method of claim 12, wherein determining the one or more roaming quality assessments comprises determining an interband score for each of the plurality of client devices based on an RSSI delta associated with each of a plurality of interband roaming events (Amimi [0088] “(Step 2034). Measurements can be taken on both transmitting and receiving ends, and on all the available frequency bands (e.g., 2.4G and 5G). The measurement on the data transmitted to the device can generate RSSI values and RX rate for the device under the specific attenuation (Step 2036).”)
Claim(s) 2 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amimi (US 20170135018) in view of Pandey (US 20210120438) further in view of Wei (US 20230014083) further in view of Ganu (WO-2015168148)
Regarding claim 2 and 13, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, except wherein the one or more roaming quality assessments further include a sticky client score for each of the plurality of client devices based on a number of roaming options available to the client device and the type of roaming options available to the client device, wherein the sticky client score for each of the plurality of client devices is further based on whether a current RSSI for the client device is less than a fixed roaming threshold associated with the client device.
In an analogous art, Ganu teaches to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments, the one or more processors are further configured to determine a sticky client score for each of the plurality of client devices based on a number of roaming options available to the client device and the type of roaming options available to the client device, wherein the sticky client score for each of the plurality of client devices is further based on whether a current RSSI for the client device is less than a fixed roaming threshold associated with the client device ([0058] A network device may include a rule engine that supports determining a number of network control actions (e.g., a plurality of move mechanisms) that are supported by the network system. Move mechanisms include, but are not limited to, sticky client move (ST 250)... For example, a client device may be moved by the network system because it is a “sticky” client device. A “sticky” client device generally refers to a client device that does not disassociate with an access point even though the corresponding signal strength of a received radio frequency (RF) signal is weak. As another example, a client device may be moved by the network system to be associated with the same or different AP on a different radio frequency band. Furthermore, a client device may be moved by the network system to from a first AP to a second AP in the WLAN to balance traffic load between the first AP and the second AP.) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi’s teaching of roaming along with Pandey and Wei to also include Ganu’s teaching of sticky client so that the system can also address the special situation of a sticky client and move the sticky client to a new connection when necessary.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amimi (US 20170135018) in view of Pandey (US 20210120438) further in view of Wei (US 20230014083) further in view of Atiq (IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS & TUTORIALS, VOL. 16, NO. 2, SECOND QUARTER 2014; “Enabling Vertical Handover Decisions in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks: A State-of-the-Art and a Classification”)
Regarding claim 4, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, except wherein to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments, the one or more processors are further configured to determine a roaming latency (time delay) score for each of the plurality of roaming events. In an analogous art, Atiq teaches “determine a roaming latency score for each of the plurality of roaming events” (Page 797; Left Page, first paragraph; “Then, capabilities of the reachable networks are compared with the pre-configured user preferences and suitable scores are assigned to each of the available networks. Later on, these to different traffic classes and there is a possibility that the networks are ranked according to their objective scores and the network with the highest rank is finally selected for performing a handover. A simulation software is developed that is user friendly. It is evaluated for one performance parameter i.e., time delay which is experienced at the decision making and the session transfer phases. The total average handover delay is about 50—65ms. [172]. However, it works only if the capabilities of the neighboring networks are being input by the user or are known in advance. This approach is applicable only if more than one network are present in the vicinity.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi’s teaching of roaming along with Pandey and Wei to also include Atiq’s teaching of determining a roaming latency score as an additional factor to take into consideration when making a roaming decision to improve the chance of success in roaming.
Regarding claim 5, Amimi and Pandey and Atiq teach the system of claim 4, wherein to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments, the processors are further configured to determine a roaming metric indicative of roaming performance of the wireless network based on the roaming quality assessments for each of the plurality of roaming events (Amimi [0104] If the link quality problem persists, the mesh network starts to compile a list of potential roaming candidates by starting to monitor the quality of potential links from other mesh points (Step 2108). The list of candidate is calculated based on PHY parameters, such as data rate, RSSI value, etc., and the list can be used to determine the best candidate for roaming clients. For example, similar to the rate estimation techniques described above, test packets can be sent (Step 2110), and a potential link rate may be determined (e.g., by uplink RSSI and/or other parameters observed on other mesh points in proximity) (Step 2112).)
Atiq teaches the roaming latency score and (Atiq, Page 797; Left Page, first paragraph; “Then, capabilities of the reachable networks are compared with the pre-configured user preferences and suitable scores are assigned to each of the available networks. Later on, these to different traffic classes and there is a possibility that the networks are ranked according to their objective scores and the network with the highest rank is finally selected for performing a handover. A simulation software is developed that is user friendly. It is evaluated for one performance parameter i.e., time delay which is experienced at the decision making and the session transfer phases. The total average handover delay is about 50—65ms. [172]. However, it works only if the capabilities of the neighboring networks are being input by the user or are known in advance. This approach is applicable only if more than one network are present in the vicinity.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi along with Pandey and Weil’s teaching of roaming to also include Atiq’s teaching of determining a roaming latency score as an additional factor to take into consideration when making a roaming decision to improve the chance of success in roaming.
Claim(s) 10 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amimi, Pandey and Wei further in view of Centonza (US 20170135018)
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Amimi, Pandey and Wei teach the system of claim 1, except wherein to determine the one or more roaming quality assessments, the one or more processors are further configured to detect, for least one client device of the plurality of client devices, detecting a ping-pong roaming event including at least two successive roaming events executed by the client device wherein a time difference between execution of a first roaming event of the at least two successive roaming events and execution of a second roaming event of the at least two successive roaming events satisfies a predetermined period of time. In an analogous art, Centonza teaches detecting a ping-pong roaming event including at least two successive roaming events executed by the client device wherein a time difference between execution of a first roaming event of the at least two successive roaming events and execution of a second roaming event of the at least two successive roaming events satisfies a predetermined period of time (Fig. 11; Step 1105; [0128] “Action 1105. According to embodiments herein the second radio base station 13 detects a short stay handover as the user equipment 11 is only in the second cell 16 a time interval below the time threshold. The time may be measured from handover completion to the second cell 16 to handover execution to the third cell 17.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Amimi’s teaching of roaming along with Pandey and Wei to also include Ganu’s teaching of detecting the ping-pong event to increase the chance of success in roaming.
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Centonza (US 20180132170) in view of Stephenson (US 20080253314) in view of further Pandey (20200052981).
Regarding claim 19, Centonza teaches a network management system comprising: one or more processors (Fig. 15 Processing circuit 1507); and
memory (Fig. 15 1511, Memory) including instructions that when executed by the one or more processors configure the one or more processors to:
determine, for at least one client device associated with a wireless network including a plurality of access point devices (APs), whether a time difference between a first roaming event and a second roaming event in a sequence of two successive roaming events executed by the client device satisfy a predetermined time period (Fig. 11; Step 1105; [0128] “Action 1105. According to embodiments herein the second radio base station 13 detects a short stay handover as the user equipment 11 is only in the second cell 16 a time interval below the time threshold. The time may be measured from handover completion to the second cell 16 to handover execution to the third cell 17.” [0033] “ping-pong Handover, also known as Handover Oscillation, which is when the user equipment is handover back and forth within a short period of time.” Fig. 4 shows ping-pong roaming within a time difference of T. The first roaming event from Cell A to Cell B; and then second roaming event from Cell B back to Cell A within a short interval T.); and
based on a determination that a current AP of the plurality of APs for the first roaming event matches a target AP of the plurality of APs for the second roaming event, detect a ping-pong roaming event ([0033] “ping-pong Handover, also known as Handover Oscillation, which is when the user equipment is handover back and forth within a short period of time. [0037] Improper handover parameter setting may make the user equipment handover back and forth between two neighbouring cells so called Ping-pong Handover or Handover oscillation. An example of this is a setting that makes the triggering conditions for the handover events A3 valid between the source and neighbour cells at the same time. FIG. 4 illustrates handover oscillation. A user equipment is said to have experienced handover oscillation if it stays in a target cell for a duration T that is less than a handover oscillation threshold Tocs, before it is handed back to the source cel).
perform a remedial action to address the ping-pong roaming event (Fig. 11; Step 1105 Detect short stay handover/ping-pong event; Step 1107 Change handover parameter; “[0137] Action 1107. The first radio base station 12 may then change handover parameter or parameters based on the received indication. For example, the first radio base station 12 may set-up a direct handover to the third cell 17 instead of the second cell 16”).
However, Centonza does not explicitly teach “determine, based on detecting the ping-pong roaming event, a root cause of the ping-pong roaming event and perform a remedial action to address the root cause”.
Alternatively, in an analogous art, Stephenson teaches “determine, based on detecting the ping-pong roaming event, a root cause of the ping-pong roaming event ([0090] If the wireless network management module 10 determines that the fault is a roaming count fault, the wireless network management module 10 checks if there are many wireless clients exhibiting ping-pong roaming (roaming between 2 or more wireless access points too quickly) behavior in the BSS (1170). If so, the roaming hysteresis (an RF parameter) could be increased for this wireless access point (or set of adjacent wireless access points). Note that increasing the roaming hysteresis would mean the handset would need to measure a greater differential in received signal power between two different wireless access points before the wireless client roamed. The wireless network management module 10 then checks if the behavior is specific to one vendor's radio (1172). If so, a possible roaming bug may be the root cause.) and
perform a remedial action to address the cause of ping-pong roaming ([0084] If the wireless network management module 10 detects that the roaming time is too long, it can report this to the network administrator as a WLAN impairment. Long roaming times can be caused by several different problems which the network administrator can troubleshoot. [0085] Remedial action may include re-site surveying (to diagnose whether the roaming delay is caused by lack of radio coverage) and sniffing packets on the wired LAN to determine if infrastructure equipment is not responding quickly enough to support a fast roam. For example, a security server needed for re-association may be overloaded or LAN switches may not be updating their forwarding tables quickly enough.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply Stephenson's teaching of determining a root cause of ping-pong roaming and perform a remedial action to address the root cause to Centonza's teaching of detecting ping-pong roaming so that the action can be more specific to the cause/problem and thereby increase the success rate of the action.
Stephenson teaches perform a remedial action to address the cause of ping-pong roaming ([[0085] Remedial action may include re-site surveying (to diagnose whether the roaming delay is caused by lack of radio coverage). However, Stephenson does not explicitly teach addressing the root cause.
In an analogous art, Pandey suggests remedy the situation of the root cause. ([0050] ... analyzer 312 may be configured to build predictive models for the joining/roaming time by taking into account a large plurality of parameters/observations .. cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Centonza's teaching of detecting ping-pong roaming and Stephenson’s teaching of remedial action to the ping pong roaming to also include Pandey's teaching of addressing the root cause so that the specific root cause can be addressed and thereby resulting in a more tailored and effective solution/remedy to the roaming problem.
Regarding claim 20, Centonza, Stephenson and Pandey teach the network management system of claim 19, wherein to perform the remedial action, the memory including instructions that when executed by the one or more processors configure the one or more processors to: automatically invoke at least one remedial action to address the cause of the ping- pong roaming event, wherein the remedial action includes reconfiguring operation of at least one of the plurality of APs in the wireless network (Centonza; Fig. 11; Step 1105 Detect short stay handover/ping-pong event; Step 1107 Change handover parameter; “[0137] Action 1107. The first radio base station 12 may then change handover parameter or parameters based on the received indication. For example, the first radio base station 12 may set-up a direct handover to the third cell 17 instead of the second cell 16”).
Pandey suggests remedy the situation of the root cause. ([0050] ... analyzer 312 may be configured to build predictive models for the joining/roaming time by taking into account a large plurality of parameters/observations ... cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Centonza's teaching of detecting ping-pong roaming and Stephenson’s teaching of remedial action to the ping pong roaming to also include Pandey's teaching of addressing the root cause so that the specific root cause can be addressed and thereby resulting in a more tailored and effective solution/remedy to the roaming problem.
Regarding claim 21, Centonza, Stephenson and Pandey teach the network management system of claim 19, wherein to perform the remedial action, the memory including instructions that when executed by the one or more processors configure the one or more processors to: generate a notification indicative of the ping-pong roaming event and a recommendation of at least one remedial action to address the ping-pong roaming event (Stephenson [0021] the wireless network management module may perform one or more corrective actions based on information from the diagnostic stage. Such corrective actions may include outputting a recommendation for a network administrator, automatically performing remedial policies, which may involve reconfiguring the wireless network, and/or providing metric information for the network administrator. [0086] “in some cases voice handsets may "ping pong" quickly between two wireless access points. If this happens, many packets may be lost during the roams resulting in intermittent audio to the end user. If the roaming count reported to the radio management system is higher than a defined threshold, then remedial action may be taken by the network administrator.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Centonza's teaching of detecting ping-pong roaming and Pandey’s teaching of addressing the root cause to also include Stephenson’s teaching of notification indicative of the ping-pong roaming event and a recommendation so that the operator can be aware of the situation and take the most appropriate action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 and 16-18 have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection.
Applicant argument’s regarding the amended claim 1 is moot in view of the newly cited reference of new Pandey (US 20210120438) and Wei (US 20230014083). The examiner also notes that this Pandey reference is a new and has different document number than that cited in prior action.
Applicant argues that,
“While Centonza paragraphs [0033] and [0037] describe a "Ping-pong Handover," the cited paragraphs of Centonza describe what a Ping-pong Handover is and when a user equipment is said to have experienced a Ping-pong Handover. For example, Centonza paragraph [0037] states: Improper handover parameter setting may make the user equipment handover back and forth between two neighbouring cells so called Ping-pong Handover or Handover oscillation. An example of this is a setting that makes the triggering conditions for the handover events A3 valid between the source and neighbour cells at the same time. FIG. 4 illustrates handover oscillation. A user equipment is said to have experienced handover oscillation if it stays in a target cell for a duration T that is less than a handover oscillation threshold Toes, before it is handed back to the source cell. The oscillation rate may be defined as the ratio between the number of oscillations and the total number of HOs. Determining whether a duration of a user equipment staying in a target cell is less than a handover oscillation threshold, as described in Centonza, does not describe or suggest "a time difference between a first roaming event and a second roaming event in a sequence of two successive roaming events executed by the client device," as recited in claim 19.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner submits that Centonza teaches "a time difference (The time may be measured from handover completion to the second cell 16 to handover execution to the third cell 17) between a first roaming event and a second roaming event in a sequence of two successive roaming events (handover to second cell and handover to third cell) executed by the client device”. (see Centonza Figure 11; Step 1105; [0128] “Action 1105. According to embodiments herein the second radio base station 13 detects a short stay handover as the user equipment 11 is only in the second cell 16 a time interval below the time threshold. The time may be measured from handover completion to the second cell 16 to handover execution to the third cell 17.” [0033] “ping-pong Handover, also known as Handover Oscillation, which is when the user equipment is handover back and forth within a short period of time.”)
Furthermore, Fig. 4 of Centonza shows ping-pong roaming within a time difference of T. The first roaming event from Cell A to Cell B; and then second roaming event from Cell B back to Cell A (which is equivalent to two successive roaming events) within a short interval T.);
Applicant argues that,
“Stephenson does not make up for the deficiencies of Pandey. Stephenson paragraph [0090] describes "roaming hysteresis (an RF parameter) could be increased for [a] wireless access point (or set of adjacent wireless access points)" if there are many wireless clients exhibiting ping-pong roaming, and "checks if the behavior is specific to one vendor's radio" to determine that "a possible roaming bug may be the root cause." While Stephenson describes determining a root cause of wireless client devices exhibiting ping-pong roaming behavior, the cited paragraphs of Stephenson do not describe or suggest "perform a remedial action to address the root cause of the ping-pong roaming event," as recited in amended claim 19.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the newly arranged rejection teaches the alleged missing limitation. As addressed in the newly arranged rejection, Stephenson teaches perform a remedial action to address the cause of ping-pong roaming ([[0085] Remedial action may include re-site surveying (to diagnose whether the roaming delay is caused by lack of radio coverage). However, Stephenson does not explicitly teach addressing the root cause. Pandey was cited to show the remedy the situation of the root cause. ([0050].. analyzer 312 may be configured to build predictive models for the joining/roaming time by taking into account a large plurality of parameters/observations .. cloud service 312 will be able to identify the major root cause of this predicted condition, thus allowing cloud service 302 to remedy the situation before it occurs). Therefore, Stephenson’s teaching of remedial action to the ping pong roaming combined with Pandey's teaching of addressing the root cause would result in the claimed limitation of “perform a remedial action to address the root cause of the ping-pong roaming event”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG L LAM whose telephone number is (571)272-6497. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Thursday 9-5pm.
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, Jeanette Parker can be reached at 571-270-3647. 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.
/DUNG L LAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2646
/JEANETTE J PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2646