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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1, 9, 14 and 23 are amended. Claims 1, 4-14 and 16-23 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
3. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 5/19/2026 with respect to claims 1, 4-14 and 16-23, have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
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.
5. Claim 1, 4-9, 12-14 and 16-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barton et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0092754 A1) in view of McGrath et al. (US. Pub. No. 2020/0028791 A1) and further in view of Bush et al. (US. Pub. No. 2025/0184809 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Barton discloses a method (See Abstract) comprising:
receiving a number of Transmit Opportunities (TxOPs) to use for transmitting data between an Access Point (AP) and a client device over a wireless link (See Par. [28]-[29] and Fig. 2 of Barton for a reference to the time sensitivity networking (TSN) central network controller (CNC) 110 receives the radio frequency (RF) profile associated with the station, and based on the received RF profile, determines the number of transmit opportunities (TXOPs) to transmit data between AP 155 and station 135);
providing, based on the number of TxOPs, an initial gate configuration to the AP for transmitting data between the AP and the client device (See Par. [30] and Fig. 2 of Barton for a reference to the TSN CNC 110 provides the determined number of TXOPs to the wireless controller associated with the AP 155) over the wireless link for a transmit period of each cycle of a number of cycles (See Par. [18], [29] of Barton for a reference to the TSN CNC 110 determines the number of TXOPs (cycles) that may be allocated for the next scheduled data interval, based on the determined data amount and the data rate that may be transmitted during the next scheduled data interval);
Barton does not explicitly disclose detecting a change in a network condition of the wireless link; and adjusting, by a Real Time (RT) scheduler, the initial gate configuration independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in a current cycle of the number of cycles in response detecting the change in the network condition of the wireless, wherein adjusting the initial gate configuration by the Real Time (RT) scheduler independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in the current cycle of the number of cycles in an additional time budget allocated to the RT scheduler.
However, McGrath discloses detecting a change in a network condition of the wireless link (See Par. [26]-[27], [42], [95] of McGrath for a reference to detecting a performance issue in the network due to a change in the link’s time sensitive parameters [new VIF workload in the network]); and adjusting, by a Real Time (RT) scheduler, the initial gate configuration independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in a current cycle of the number of cycles in response detecting the change in the network condition of the wireless (See Par. [26]-[27], [35], [39] of McGrath for a reference to that when a new VIF workload, with its associated deterministic and real-time packet cycle times, is to be deployed on a customer's edge compute node, an updated [Adjusted] TSN schedule is created to accommodate that new VIF workload in the network. The updated TSN Schedule is created for this particular time cycle by the second softswitch [Real-Time scheduler]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of McGrath to Barton. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by using a duplicate softswitch to enable dynamic changing of the existing TSN schedule implemented by the softswitch executing on the compute node more efficiently. (McGrath; Par. [95])
The combination of Barton and McGrath does not explicitly disclose wherein adjusting the initial gate configuration by the Real Time (RT) scheduler independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in the current cycle of the number of cycles in an additional time budget allocated to the RT scheduler
However, Bush discloses wherein adjusting the initial gate configuration by the Real Time (RT) scheduler independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in the current cycle of the number of cycles in an additional time budget allocated to the RT scheduler (See Par. [38], [60]-[61], [67] of Bush for a reference to that based on the received real-time feedback of the radio conditions, re-calculating {adjusting] the TSN schedule to meet the packet delay budget either at this specific TSN block/Cycle [Delay is interpreted as additional time allocated to the real time scheduler] ).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bush to the combination of Barton and McGrath. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving performance metrics including latency, jitter, packet delay variation, and bandwidth utilization. (Bush; Par. [45])
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush, specifically Barton discloses wherein detecting the change in the network condition of the wireless link comprises detecting the change in the network condition of the wireless link based on a derivative of a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) received from the client device (See Par. [28] of Barton for a reference to the station 135 may report, to the AP 155, several points of RSSIs received from the AP 155. The TSN CNC 110 analyzes the received points and determines a slope. If the slope is steep, this means that the stochasticity is changing quickly).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush, specifically Barton discloses wherein detecting the change in the network condition of the wireless link comprises predicting the network condition of the wireless link based on tracking past movements of the client device and obtaining stochasticity of a signal received from the client device at different points in its past movement (See Par. [25], [28]-[29] of Barton for a reference to tracking past movement of the station and obtaining the stochasticity of a signal received from the station at different points in the past movement).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush, specifically Barton discloses wherein receiving the number of TxOPs to use for transmitting data between the AP and the client device over the wireless link comprises receiving the number of TxOPs from a Central Network Controller of a Time Sensitive Network (TSN) (See Par. [19], [28]-[30] and Figs. 1 & 2 of Barton for a reference to the time sensitivity networking (TSN) central network controller (CNC) 110 receives the RF profile, including the number of TXOPs to use for transmitting data between the AP 155 and the Station 135).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush, specifically Barton discloses wherein receiving the number of TxOPs to use for transmitting data between the AP and the client device over the wireless link comprises receiving the number of TxOPs for transmitting the data between the AP and the client device that is in motion (See Par. [23], [28]-[29] and Fig. 2 of Barton for a reference to the time sensitivity networking (TSN) central network controller (CNC) 110 receives the radio frequency (RF) profile associated with the station, and based on the received RF profile, determines the number of transmit opportunities (TXOPs) to transmit data between AP 155 and station 135, wherein the station is in motion).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush, specifically Barton discloses wherein receiving the number of TxOPs to use for transmitting data between the AP and the client device over the wireless link comprises receiving the number of TxOPs to use for transmitting the data between the AP and the client device based on a Radio Frequency (RF) profile associated with the wireless link (See Par. [28]-[29] and Fig. 2 of Barton for a reference to the time sensitivity networking (TSN) central network controller (CNC) 110 receives the radio frequency (RF) profile associated with the station, and based on the received RF profile, determines the number of transmit opportunities (TXOPs) to transmit data between AP 155 and station 135).
Regarding Claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 1, including a system (See Fig. 3; Computing Device 300) comprising: a memory storage (See Fig. 3; Memory 315); and a processing unit coupled to the memory storage (See Fig. 3; Processing Unit 310).
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 8.
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 5.
Regarding Claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 1, including a non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores a set of instructions which when executed performs a method (See Par. [36]-[37] of Barton for a reference to a computer-readable medium that stores a set of instructions).
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 5.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 4.
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Barton and McGrath does not explicitly disclose allocating, by the NRT schedular, an additional time budget to the RT schedular from the transmit period in the each cycle of the number of cycles.
However, Bush discloses allocating, by the NRT schedular, an additional time budget to the RT schedular from the transmit period in the each cycle of the number of cycles (See Par. [38], [60]-[61], [67] of Bush for a reference to that based on the received real-time feedback of the radio conditions, re-calculating {adjusting] the TSN schedule to meet the packet delay budget either at this specific TSN block/Cycle [Delay is interpreted as additional time allocated to the real time scheduler] ).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bush to the combination of Barton and McGrath. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving performance metrics including latency, jitter, packet delay variation, and bandwidth utilization. (Bush; Par. [45])
Regarding claim 22, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 21.
Regarding Claim 23, the combination of Barton and McGrath does not explicitly disclose wherein adjusting the initial gate configuration by the Real Time (RT) scheduler independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in the current cycle of the number of cycles comprises freeing up one or more gates when not all gates are being used to transmit data.
However, Bush discloses adjusting the initial gate configuration by the Real Time (RT) scheduler independent of the NRT scheduler for the transmit period in the current cycle of the number of cycles in the additional time budget allocated to the RT scheduler (See Par. [63] of Bush for a reference to the transmission of the data frame can be initiated by a selective opening of a gate of the respective TSN block 202 to transmit the data frame. Conversely, the transmission of the data frame can be ceased or prevented by a selective closing of the gate of the respective TSN block 202 to transmit the data frame [Some gates are opened for data transmission and some are closed [Freed/ceased from transmitting data]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bush to the combination of Barton and McGrath. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving performance metrics including latency, jitter, packet delay variation, and bandwidth utilization. (Bush; Par. [45])
6. Claim 10-11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barton et al. in view of McGrath et al. in view of Bush et al. and further in view of Barton et al. (US. Pub. No. 2024/0064788 A1, Referred to as Barton’788).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush does not explicitly disclose wherein the system comprises a Digital Network Architecture Center (DNAC) controller.
However, Barton’788 discloses wherein the system comprises a Digital Network Architecture Center (DNAC) controller (See Par. [20] of Barton’788 for a reference to the controller 105 may be implemented by a digital network architecture center (DNAC) controller to provide transmission schedules in an RF environment).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Barton’788 to the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling time critical and non-critical traffic to be converged in one network, and enabling higher layer protocol to share network infrastructure. (Barton’788; Par. [13])
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush does not explicitly disclose wherein the DNAC controller comprises a Non-Real Time (NRT) scheduler and a Real Time (RT) scheduler.
However, Barton’788 discloses disclose wherein the DNAC controller comprises a Non-Real Time (NRT) scheduler and a Real Time (RT) scheduler (See Par. [17], [20], [37] of Barton’788 for a reference to the controller 105 may be implemented by a digital network architecture center (DNAC) controller, which comprises a Time sensitive network scheduler (RT) and a Non-Time sensitive network scheduler (NRT)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Barton’788 to the combination of Barton, McGrath and Bush. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by enabling time critical and non-critical traffic to be converged in one network, and enabling higher layer protocol to share network infrastructure. (Barton’788; Par. [13])
Conclusion
7. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Masui (US. Pub. No. 2023/0074727 A1) discloses a resonance suppression control device that suppresses vibrations in a resonance frequency of a control target.
Marr, JR. et al. (US. Pub. No. 2022/0271569 A1) discloses high-power microwave systems and their use in generating electromagnetic pulsed radiation.
Reddy et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0243797 A1) discloses a method for radio synchronous status messaging between communications units in wireless communications systems.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to RASHA FAYED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3804. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the supervisory Examiner, Un Cho can be reached on (571)272-7919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.K.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
