DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
This action is responsive to the RCE filed on 1/20/26.
Claim(s) 1-8, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19-20, 22 is/are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19-20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Veijalainen, U.S. Pub/Patent No. US 2021/0314790 A1.
As to claim 1, Veijalainen teaches a method for handling a change in a physical environment in which a network provides service, the method comprising:
obtaining an indication of change in the physical environment (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39; i.e., [0039] Thus, a challenge may exist in how to consider dynamic changes of the physical environment that impact the deterministic behavior of the radio channel or radio network. A state of the physical environment may indicate a state, location, position, orientation ( or other physical characteristic) of physical objects in the environment); and
performing an action when the indication fulfils a condition, wherein the action pertains to at least one of:
obtaining radio measurements from network equipment operating in the network, providing radio measurement configuration to the network equipment , providing network configuration to the network equipment (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39-40; i.e., [0039] Thus, in this example, it can be seen that the state of the physical environment may be used to predict a future state of the radio network state of radio network performance, and/or may be used to try different actions ( e.g., different radio network actions and/or physical environment actions) to determine which action provides the best improvement in radio network performance. For example, one or more actions may be performed ( or even performed and then measured to determine which action(s) provide the best performance increase), such as, e.g., increasing transmission power; [0040] performing, based on the selected associated sensor and radio network information data samples, at least one action, e.g., where the action may include, for example, performing a radio network action such as adjusting a radio network parameter or configuration),
wherein the radio measurement configuration pertains to at least one of:
periodicity for performing radio measurements, periodicity for reporting radio measurements, type of radio measurements to be performed, locations in the physical environment at which radio measurements are to be performed (Veijalainen, page 3, paragraph 35; i.e., [0035] According to an example embodiment, radio network measurements (e.g., UE measurements) may be mapped to or associated with the state of the physical environment. Actions ( e.g., radio network actions, or possible changes in the physical environment) may be performed that are predicted or expected to improve radio network performance).
As to claim 2, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on comparing the indication to the condition, whether or not the action is to be performed (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 38; i.e., [0038] UE may be performed preemptively ( e.g., before a significant decrease in received power is detected) when the location of the robot 210 moves from 130 m to 140m (e.g., location is before the x-coordinate of 150 m where the decrease in radio network performance ( e.g., received power) to provide sufficient time that is greater than or equal to delay 222, e.g., to improve performance of the radio network).
As to claim 3, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein, according to the condition, the action is to be performed only when the change in the physical environment is larger than a threshold value (Veijalainen, page 8, paragraph 75 i.e., an error event occurs when the SINR drops below the threshold 914. As noted, this may occur when the dynamic blocking object 812 is within a specific range of locations or positions).
As to claim 4, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 2, wherein the network provides service in a service area of the physical environment, and wherein, based on said comparing, it is determined whether to perform the action for the whole service area or only a part of the service area as identified from the change in the physical environment (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39-40; i.e., [0039] Thus, a challenge may exist in how to consider dynamic changes of the physical environment that impact the deterministic behavior of the radio channel or radio network. A state of the physical environment may indicate a state, location, position, orientation ( or other physical characteristic) of physical objects in the environment. Thus, in this example, it can be seen that the state of the physical environment may be used to predict a future state of the radio network state of radio network performance, For example, one or more actions may be performed ( or even performed and then measured to determine which action(s) provide the best performance increase), such as, e.g., increasing transmission power).
As to claim 5, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 2, wherein whether or not the action is to be performed is determined also based on information available in a database (Veijalainen, page 6, paragraph 58; i.e., [0058] stored to a database from which data can be fetched for later use, or they are continuously forwarded for some further).
As to claim 6, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 5, wherein the database comprises a digital representation of the network and the physical environment for simulating network behavior of the network in the physical environment (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39-40; i.e., [0039] to determine which action provides the best improvement in radio network performance. For example, one or more actions may be performed ( or even performed and then measured to determine which action(s) provide the best performance increase), such as, e.g., increasing transmission power; [0040] performing a radio network action such as adjusting a radio network parameter or configuration, and/or performing an action with respect to the physical environment such as moving or changing a state of an object) to improve performance of the radio network).
As to claim 7, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 5, wherein, based on said comparing, it is determined that radio measurements from network equipment in the physical environment are not to be obtained when radio measurements for the change in the physical environment are already available in the database (Veijalainen, page 2, paragraph 32; i.e., [0032] measured change in a radio
measurement or measured KPI for the radio network may arise because, for example, by the time the change in measurement or KPI for the radio network has been detected, there may be insufficient time to perform one or more actions to avoid further degradation in network performance).
As to claim 8, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 2, wherein, based on said comparing, it is determined that radio measurements from the network equipment in the physical environment are to be obtained, and wherein, when the radio measurements have been obtained, it is determined based on the radio measurements whether or not network configuration is to be provided to the network equipment operating in the network (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39-40; i.e., [0039] dynamic changes of the physical environment that impact the deterministic behavior of the radio channel or radio network. A state of the physical environment may indicate a state, location, position, orientation ( or other physical characteristic) of physical objects in the environment. Thus, in this example, it can be seen that the state of the physical environment may be used to predict a future state of the radio network state of radio network performance, and/or may be used to try different actions ( e.g., different radio network actions and/or physical environment actions) to determine which action provides the best improvement in radio network performance).
As to claim 11, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the indication of change in the physical environment is provided by positioning measurements in the physical environment, and wherein the action further pertains to at least one of: obtaining positioning measurements from positioning equipment in the physical environment, providing positioning measurement configuration to the positioning equipment (Veijalainen, page 4, paragraph 39-40; i.e., [0039] Thus, a challenge may exist in how to consider dynamic changes of the physical environment that impact the deterministic behavior of the radio channel or radio network. A state of the physical environment may indicate a state, location, position, orientation ( or other physical characteristic) of physical objects in the environment. Thus, in this example, it can be seen that the state of the physical environment may be used to predict a future state of the radio network state of radio network performance, and/or may be used to try different actions ( e.g., different radio network actions and/or physical environment actions) to determine which action provides the best improvement in radio network performance).
As to claim 13, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the network configuration pertains to at least one of: radio resource allocation, handover parameters, network slicing settings, antenna settings (Veijalainen, page 10, paragraph 103; i.e., [0103] a link adaptation for a radio link between a base station and a user device; a cell selection or cell reselection performed by a user device; a scheduling; a resource allocation).
As to claim 15, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the indication is obtained from at least one sensor monitoring the physical environment (Veijalainen, figure 4).
As to claim 17, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the indication of change in the physical environment pertains to any of: change in lighting level, change in temperature, change in location of a physical object in the physical environment, or any combination thereof (Veijalainen, page 5, paragraph 43; i.e., [0043] sensor data samples associated with a state of the physical environment, e.g., such as a location, position, orientation or other state of an object).
As to claim 19, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the method is performed by a network management entity in the network (Veijalainen, figure 14).
As to claim 20, Veijalainen teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the network equipment are any of: IoT devices, autonomous vehicles, automated guided vehicles, user equipment, access nodes, core network nodes, or any combination thereof (Veijalainen, page 2, paragraph 28; i.e., [0028] IoT).
Claim(s) 22 is/are directed to a system claim and they do not teach or further define over the limitations recited in claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim(s) 22 is/are also rejected for similar reasons set forth in claim(s) 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19-20, 22 has/have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant’s arguments include the failure of previously applied art to expressly disclose “wherein the radio measurement configuration pertains to at least one of:
periodicity for performing radio measurements, periodicity for reporting radio measurements, type of radio measurements to be performed, locations in the physical environment at which radio measurements are to be performed” (see Applicant’s response, 2/11/26, page 7). It is evident from the detailed mappings found in the above rejection(s) that Veijalainen disclosed this functionality (see Veijalainen, page 3, paragraph 35). Further, it is clear from the numerous teachings (previously and currently cited) that the provision for “wherein the radio measurement configuration pertains to at least one of: periodicity for performing radio measurements, periodicity for reporting radio measurements, type of radio measurements to be performed, locations in the physical environment at which radio measurements are to be performed” was widely implemented in the networking art. Thus, Applicant’s arguments drawn toward distinction of the claimed invention and the prior art teachings on this point are not considered persuasive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument(s) filed 1/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1
Appellant argues on page 7 of the Argument (claim(s) 1 & 22),
“Veijalainen does not discloses “providing radio measurement configuration by UE to the network equipment, upon occurrence of an event in the environment””.
Examiner’s response to Argument 1:
In response to applicant's argument that the reference(s) failed to show certain feature(s) of applicant's invention, it is noted that the feature(s) upon which applicant relies (i.e., providing radio measurement configuration by UE to the network equipment, upon occurrence of an event in the environment) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claim(s) 1 & 22 are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In addition, as describe in Veijalainen (Veijalainen, page 3, paragraph 35; i.e., [0035] According to an example embodiment, radio network measurements (e.g., UE measurements) may be mapped to or associated with the state of the physical environment. Actions ( e.g., radio network actions, or possible changes in the physical environment) may be performed that are predicted or expected to improve radio network performance), the invention disclosed the method of measurement radio network or UE measurements that map to the physical environment. Therefore, a reasonable interpretation of " wherein the radio measurement configuration pertains to at least one of: periodicity for performing radio measurements, periodicity for reporting radio measurements, type of radio measurements to be performed, locations in the physical environment at which radio measurements are to be performed " has been made, and the Examiner believes Veijalainen are within the scope of such interpretation.
Listing of Relevant Arts
Harris, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20150373613 A1 discloses moving from first to second locations, achieve QoS.
Siomina, U.S. Patent/Pub. No. US 20150195730 A1 discloses moving or changing its location or environment, radio measurement.
Contact Information
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
THUONG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3864. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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.
/THUONG NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights