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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/3/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments filed 10/3/2025 have overcome 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections of claims 1, 3-15, and 17-20 and thus, the corresponding rejections are withdrawn (for clarity, examiner notes applicant’s arguments have merely argued the term “network resource” is “enabled”, which, as best understood, applicant is arguing the term “network resource” is not indefinite, however, as explained on pages [2-3, 7-8] in the OA of 7/3/2025, at issue is the scope of enablement between “network resource” and “bandwidth”, not whether “network resource” has meaning or not). Further, applicant's arguments filed 10/3/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments include: Bello (US 2014/0141793 A1) and Novak (US 2013/0003591 A1) fail to teach “transmitting the first demand profile data to the network device: receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a different mobile device, other than the mobile device, that utilizes the service enabled via the network device: and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device, adjusting an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a third amount that differs from the first amount” because “There is absolutely no collaboration between mobile devices and the network element, as claimed by the Applicant's independent claims. Again, the collaboration involves that a mobile device will transmit the first demand profile data to the network device and then receive from the network equipment aggregate demand data that includes the demand profile data of the mobile device and at least a second demand profile data of another different mobile device for the same network resource[sic].” (emphasis by applicant), because
A) “the proposed combination (Bello and Novak) would disclose a process that merely receives a content request (as taught by Bello)” as described in the remarks on pages [10, 12], and provides para. 41 of Bello emphasizing the request for content for support. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding A), as clearly pointed out by para. 41 of Bello, the process is not mere “receives a content request” as shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
332
732
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Para. 41 clearly indicates “request” including “attributes” that includes “byte count”, “duration”, and “bandwidth consumption projection” that is provided to a service provider, clearly indicating bandwidth that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device during a first time interval and provided to a server, which, along with cited para. 21, teaches the claimed limitation generating first demand profile data comprising first resource demand data indicative of a first amount of a bandwidth, that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device, during a first time interval, in connection with an utilization of a service enabled via a network device; transmitting the first demand profile data to the network device. As support for examiner’s stance, para. 39-40 also describes mobile device generates “bandwidth consumption projection”.
B) “forwards that content request to a channel occupancy and location database (COLD) server situated within a network (as taught by Novak)” and thus, “There is absolutely no collaboration between mobile devices and the network element, as claimed by the Applicant's independent claims” as described in the remarks on pages [10, 12]. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding B), as explained in the OA of 7/3/2025, applicant is arguing limitations not claimed. As best understood, applicant is ascribing a particular interpretation not commensurate with claim language. Claim language merely includes “transmitting the first demand profile data to the network device”, “receiving, from the network device”, “in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device” which merely indicates data transmitted between a mobile device and a network device. Further, applicant’s own specification describes “network device” as “can be a server or gateway device, typically residing in a core network portion of the communication network” in para. 26, and “can be, e.g., a gateway device located in a core network portion of the communication network” in para. 76, thus, is not specifically limited to a particular device/location and broadest reasonable interpretation of “network device” could include UEs, BSs (eNB, gNB, APs), routers, gateways, core network devices, etc., or any device connected to the network. Still further, claims 17 and 21 claim “network equipment” (not explicitly described in the specification and not the “network device” argued) further supporting examiner’s stance that “network device” is not specifically limited. The specification further describes communication as “can be a predefined structure as with a conventional network or simply an ad hoc communication between at least two devices” in para. 113, and para. 41-42 describes “Demand data 104 can be provided to access point device 100 (e.g., an eNodeB, or another suitable base station or cell) that provides access to network device 102 of a communication network” and “Mobile device 500 can be configured to receive from access point device 100 price data 112 representing a price of bandwidth usage over the defined period 402” (emphasis added) which, notably, does not describe the “network device” receiving demand data. Accordingly, Novak teaches receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a different mobile device, other than the mobile device, that utilizes the service enabled via the network device, and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device, adjusting an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a third amount that differs from the first amount as detailed in the rejection below.
In light of the above, the examiner finds applicant’s arguments non-persuasive.
The examiner recommends further amendments to capture intended subject matter commensurate with arguments to advance prosecution.
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, 5-7, 10-11, 13, 17, and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bello et al. (US 2014/0141793 A1) hereinafter Bello, in view of Novak et al. (US 2013/0003591 A1) hereinafter Novak.
Regarding claim 1, Bello teaches a mobile device (mobile device 204; para. 26 and Fig. 2), comprising: a processor (device includes computer; para. 26, computer includes processor 104; para. 20 and Fig. 1); and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, facilitate performance of operations (device and computer including software in memory for execution; para. [14-15, 20, 27]), the operations comprising: generating first demand profile data comprising first resource demand data indicative of a first amount of a bandwidth that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device (user of device requests [generates] data per time anticipated to be consumed including bandwidth consumption projection; para. [21, 39-41]), during a first time interval (units of time, length of media; para. 41), in connection with utilization of a service enabled via a network device (media provided by service provider server; para. [21, 41]); transmitting the first demand profile data to the network device (user of device requests [transmits] data per time anticipated to be consumed including bandwidth consumption projection; para. [21, 39-41]).
Bello does not explicitly disclose receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a different mobile device, other than the mobile device, that utilizes the service enabled via the network device; and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device, adjusting an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a third amount that differs from the first amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak teaches receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth (base station provides report of scheduled/allocated and request of resources (aggregation indicative of second amount) to channel occupancy and location database (COLD) server; para. [28, 76, 80, 83, 104], COLD server included in UE/distributed/centralized/server after BSs/APs; para. [51, 83-84, 94-95 and Fig. 3]) that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a different mobile device, other than the mobile device (devices including different device determining service used to communicate during future time, resource requests from devices to base station; para. [54, 68, 77, 80], device requests (forecasted) resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83), that utilizes the service enabled via the network device (device determining service used to communicate during future time, resource requests from devices to base station; para. [54, 68, 77, 80]); and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device (device requests [forecasted] resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83, base station provides report of scheduled/allocated resources [after/in response to transmitting demand data]; para. [28, 76, 80, 83]), adjusting an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a third amount that differs from the first amount (device / COLD server adjusts [first amount] forecasted [third amount] resource allocation [first interval] based on usage / message / schedule / exact resources including bandwidth; para. [45, 68, 83-84, 104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the system of Bello, where Bello’s predictive information (para. 05-06) along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Bello further teaches wherein the operations further comprise determining priority data indicative of a level of importance assigned to forecasted consumption of the bandwidth by the mobile device during the first time interval (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted [determined] by device to determine whether to reduce that service]; para. 35).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 5.
Bello further teaches wherein the first demand profile data that is transmitted to the network device further comprises the priority data (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted by device to determine whether to reduce that service]; para. 35).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Bello further teaches wherein the second demand profile data further comprises second priority data indicative of a second level of importance assigned to forecasted consumption of the bandwidth by the different mobile device during the first time interval (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction for other users [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted by each device to determine whether to reduce that service], for each user including different device; para. 32-37).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Bello further teaches over a group of time intervals comprising the first time interval and a second time interval that differs from the first time interval (bandwidth consumption projection over recurring time intervals; para. 45).
Bello does not explicitly disclose wherein the aggregate demand data is indicative of aggregation of forecasted consumption of the bandwidth by a group of mobile devices comprising the mobile device and the different mobile device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak further teaches wherein the aggregate demand data is indicative of aggregation of forecasted consumption of the bandwidth by a group of mobile devices comprising the mobile device and the different mobile device (devices including different device determining service used to communicate during future time, resource requests from devices to base station; para. [54, 77, 80], device requests (forecasted) resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83, base station provides report of scheduled/allocated resources (aggregate demand data); para. [28, 76, 80, 83])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
Bello does not explicitly disclose wherein the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed during the first time interval comprises performing a shifting procedure that shifts consumption of the bandwidth between the first time interval and the second time interval based on the aggregate demand data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak further teaches wherein the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed during the first time interval (device / COLD server adjusts resource allocation based on message / schedule; para. [45, 104]) comprises performing a shifting procedure that shifts consumption of the bandwidth between the first time interval and the second time interval based on the aggregate demand data (resolve conflicts by suggesting re-assignment or alternate time for transmission; para. [56, 92]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
Regarding claim 13, Bello teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium (medium / memory; para. 15), comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processor of a first mobile device, facilitate performance of operations (device includes computer; para. 26, computer includes processor 104; para. 20 and Fig. 1, device and computer including software in memory for execution; para. [14-15, 20, 27]), comprising: determining first demand profile data comprising: first resource demand data indicative of a first amount of a bandwidth that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device (user of device requests data per time anticipated to be consumed; para. 41), during a first time interval (units of time, length of media; para. 41), in connection with utilization of a service that a network device is configured to facilitate (media provided by service provider server; para. [21, 41]); and priority data indicative of a level of importance assigned to the first amount of the bandwidth that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device during the first time interval (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted [determined] by device to determine whether to reduce that service]; para. 35) transmitting the first demand profile data to the network device (user of device requests [transmits] data per time anticipated to be consumed including bandwidth consumption projection; para. [21, 39-41]).
Bello does not explicitly disclose receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a second mobile device, different than the first mobile device, that utilizes the service that the network device is configured to facilitate; and in response to the aggregate demand data, modifying an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device from the first amount to a third amount that differs from the first amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak teaches receiving, from the network device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and second demand profile data indicative of a second amount of the bandwidth (base station provides report of scheduled/allocated and request of resources (aggregation indicative of second amount) to COLD server; para. [28, 76, 80, 83, 104], COLD server included in UE/distributed/centralized/server after BSs/APs; para. [51, 83-84, 94-95 and Fig. 3]) that was forecasted to be consumed over the first time interval by a second mobile device, different than the first mobile device (devices including different device determining service used to communicate during future time, resource requests from devices to base station; para. [54, 68, 77, 80], device requests (forecasted) resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83), that utilizes the service that the network device is configured to facilitate (device determining service used to communicate during future time, resource requests from devices to base station; para. [54, 68, 77, 80]); and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network device (device requests [forecasted] resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83, base station provides report of scheduled/allocated resources [after/in response to transmitting demand data]; para. [28, 76, 80, 83]), modifying an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the first time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device to a third amount that differs from the first amount (device / COLD server adjusts [first amount] forecasted [third amount] resource allocation [first interval] based on usage / message / schedule / exact resources including bandwidth; para. [45, 68, 83-84, 104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the system of Bello, where Bello’s predictive information (para. 05-06) along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
Regarding claim 17, Bello teaches a method, comprising: determining, by a mobile device comprising a processor (device includes computer; para. 26, computer includes processor 104; para. 20 and Fig. 1, device and computer including software in memory for execution; para. [14-15, 20, 27]), first demand profile data comprising first resource demand data indicative of a first amount of a bandwidth that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device (user of device requests data per time anticipated to be consumed; para. 41), during a time interval (units of time, length of media; para. 41), in connection with utilization of a service provided by network equipment (media provided by service provider server; para. [21, 41]); transmitting, by the mobile device, the first demand profile data to the network equipment (user of device requests data per time anticipated to be consumed; para. 41).
Bello does not explicitly disclose receiving, by the mobile device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data and other demand profile data indicative of other amounts of the bandwidth that were forecasted to be consumed over the time interval by other mobile devices utilizing the service provided by the network equipment; and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network equipment, adjusting, by the mobile device, an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a second amount that differs from the first amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak teaches receiving, by the mobile device, aggregate demand data comprising an aggregation of the first demand profile data (device requests [forecasted] resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83, base station provides report of scheduled/allocated resources [after/in response to transmitting demand data]; para. [28, 76, 80, 83]) and other demand profile data indicative of other amounts of the bandwidth that were forecasted to be consumed over the time interval by other mobile devices utilizing the service provided by the network equipment (base station provides report of scheduled/allocated and request of resources (aggregation indicative of second amount) to COLD server; para. [28, 76, 80, 83, 104], COLD server included in UE/distributed/centralized/server after BSs/APs; para. [51, 83-84, 94-95 and Fig. 3]); and in response to the aggregate demand data received from the network equipment (device requests [forecasted] resources such as bandwidth for service for a duration; para. 83, base station provides report of scheduled/allocated resources [after/in response to transmitting demand data]; para. [28, 76, 80, 83]), adjusting, by the mobile device, an amount of the bandwidth that is actually consumed during the time interval from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to a second amount that differs from the first amount (device / COLD server adjusts [first amount] forecasted [third amount] resource allocation [first interval] based on usage / message / schedule / exact resources including bandwidth; para. [45, 68, 83-84, 104]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the system of Bello, where Bello’s predictive information (para. 05-06) along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 17.
Bello further teaches determining priority data indicative of a level of importance assigned to forecasted consumption of the bandwidth by the mobile device during the first time interval (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted [determined] by device to determine whether to reduce that service]; para. 35).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 21.
Bello further teaches wherein the first demand profile data that is transmitted to the network equipment further comprises the priority data (device determines bandwidth projection based upon class [classes including voice, text, video]; para. 39, each application [class] provides own bandwidth projection; para. 50, service provider ascertains class of service for reduction [at least suggesting priority indication transmitted by device to determine whether to reduce that service]; para. 35).
Claim(s) 3-4, 8-9, 12, 14, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bello in view of Novak, and further in view of Carver et al. (US 2004/0010592 A1) hereinafter Carver.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed by the different mobile device is below a defined threshold, the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises increasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to the third amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed by the different mobile device is below a defined threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth (indication of second amount below threshold) is determined; para. 125), the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises increasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the mobile device to the third amount (increasing allocation of bandwidth; para. 125).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed by the different mobile device is above a defined threshold, the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises decreasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed by the different mobile device is above a defined threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth (indication of second amount above threshold) is determined; para. 125), the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises decreasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount (increasing allocation of bandwidth; para. 125).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 7.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second priority data is below a defined threshold, the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises increasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second priority data is below a defined threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth (indication of second amount below threshold) is determined; para. 125), the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises increasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount (increasing allocation of bandwidth; para. 125).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 7.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second priority data is above a defined threshold, the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises decreasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches wherein, in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the second priority data is above a defined threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth (indication of second amount above threshold) is determined; para. 125), the adjusting of the amount of the bandwidth that is consumed comprises decreasing the amount from the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed to the third amount (increasing allocation of bandwidth; para. 125).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 11.
Bello does not explicitly disclose wherein the shifting procedure that shifts the consumption of the bandwidth between the first time interval and the second time interval.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak further teaches wherein the shifting procedure that shifts the consumption of the bandwidth between the first time interval and the second time interval (resolve conflicts by suggesting re-assignment or alternate time for transmission; para. [56, 92]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose further comprises shifting the consumption of the bandwidth based on a determination of an average consumption of the bandwidth, by the group of mobile devices, per interval of the group of time intervals.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches further comprises shifting the consumption of the bandwidth (adjusting allocation of bandwidth; para. 125) based on a determination of an average consumption of the bandwidth (determining average of utilization; para. 200, amount of spare bandwidth based on capacity available is determined to increase / decrease allocation; para. 125-126), by the group of mobile devices (each mobile station among a group places bid for bandwidth; para. 352), per interval of the group of time intervals (averaging utilization at regular intervals; para. 200).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 13.
Bello does not explicitly disclose wherein the operations further comprise performing a shifting procedure that shifts a consumption of the bandwidth from the first time interval to a second time interval.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak further teaches wherein the operations further comprise performing a shifting procedure that shifts a consumption of the bandwidth from the first time interval to a second time interval (device / COLD server adjusts resource allocation based on message / schedule; para. [45, 104], resolve conflicts by suggesting re-assignment or alternate time [first interval to second interval] for transmission; para. [56, 92]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device for the bandwidth during the first time interval is above a first threshold and the second amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the second mobile device for the bandwidth during the second time interval is below a second threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates that the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device for the bandwidth during the first time interval is above a first threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth (indication of second amount above threshold at first interval) is determined; para. 125) and the second amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the second mobile device for the bandwidth during the second time interval is below a second threshold (record of each bid/bandwidth is kept (aggregate demand); para. 125, bid/bandwidth per user; para. [222, 224], amount of spare bandwidth [indication of second amount below threshold] is determined; para. 125, when demand has fallen (below a threshold) stimulate more demand [at second interval]; para. 186).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 17.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose further comprising determining, by the mobile device, average data indicative of an average amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed in aggregate by the mobile device and the other mobile devices during multiple time intervals comprising the time interval.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches further comprising determining, by the mobile device, average data indicative of an average amount of the bandwidth forecasted to be consumed in aggregate by the mobile device and the other mobile devices (determining average of utilization; para. 200, amount of spare bandwidth based on capacity available is determined to increase / decrease allocation; para. 125-126, each mobile station among a group places bid for bandwidth; para. 352) during multiple time intervals comprising the time interval (averaging utilization at regular intervals; para. 200).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 18.
Bello does not explicitly disclose wherein the adjusting of the amount comprises increasing the second amount to be greater than the first amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Novak further teaches wherein the adjusting of the amount comprises increasing the second amount to be greater than the first amount (device / COLD server adjusts resource allocation based on message / schedule; para. [45, 104], resolve conflicts by suggesting re-assignment or alternate time [first interval to second interval] for transmission; para. [56, 92]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Novak to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Novak’s dynamic coordination of resources (para. 02-03) improves the system by improving resource use efficiency by coordinating resource use with predictive information.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose in response to a determination that the average amount is greater than an aggregate of the first amount and the other amounts.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches in response to a determination that the average amount is greater than an aggregate of the first amount and the other amounts (determining average of utilization; para. 200, adjusting allocation of bandwidth, amount of spare bandwidth based on capacity available is determined to increase / decrease allocation; para. 125-126).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bello in view of Novak, and further in view of Chetlur et al. (US 2014/0140329 A1) hereinafter Chetlur.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 13.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein the operations further comprise performing a shifting procedure that shifts consumption of the bandwidth to the first time interval from a second time interval in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device for the bandwidth during the first time interval is below a first threshold and the second amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the second mobile device for the bandwidth during the second time interval is above a second threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chetlur teaches wherein the operations further comprise performing a shifting procedure that shifts consumption of the bandwidth to the first time interval from a second time interval (projected network / bandwidth load over different periods; para. [30, 66], transmission of data in first period instead of second period; para. 66-67) in response to a determination that the aggregate demand data indicates the first amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the first mobile device for the bandwidth during the first time interval is below a first threshold (determining projected load in first period is lower than threshold; para. 66-67) and the second amount that is forecasted to be consumed by the second mobile device for the bandwidth during the second time interval is above a second threshold (determining projected load in second period exceeds threshold; para. 66-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Chetlur to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Chetlur’s time-shift of traffic (para. [30-31, 36-37]) improves resource use by enabling shifting of traffic to off-peak times.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bello in view of Novak, in view of Chetlur, and further in view of Carver.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Bello and Novak teaches the limitation of previous claim 18.
The combination of Bello and Novak does not explicitly disclose wherein the adjusting of the amount comprises reducing the second amount to be less than the first amount.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chetlur teaches wherein the adjusting of the amount comprises reducing the second amount to be less than the first amount (projected network / bandwidth load over different periods; para. [30, 66], transmission of data in first period instead of second period; para. 66-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Chetlur to the modified system of Bello and Novak, where Bello and Novak’s modified system along with Chetlur’s time-shift of traffic (para. [30-31, 36-37]) improves resource use by enabling shifting of traffic to off-peak times.
The combination of Bello, Novak, and Chetlur does not explicitly disclose in response to a determination that the average amount is less than an aggregate of the first amount and the other amounts.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Carver teaches in response to a determination that the average amount is less than an aggregate of the first amount and the other amounts (determining average of utilization; para. 200, amount of spare bandwidth based on capacity available is determined to increase / decrease allocation; para. 125-126, each mobile station among a group places bid for bandwidth; para. 352).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Carver to the modified system of Bello, Novak, and Chetlur, where Bello, Novak, and Chetlur’s modified system along with Carver’s utilizing shared resources in an efficient manner (para. [01-03, 10]) improves customer experience by enabling users the ability to bid for resources in high demand.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abou-Elkheir et al. (US 2015/0215816 A1) discloses a system and method for efficient use of network bandwidth based on user profiles and other data.
McKinnon et al. (US 2001/0038639 A1) discloses monitoring and allocating access across a shared communications medium.
Ward et al. (US 11,206,579 B1) discloses dynamic scheduling for network data transfers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 pm.
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/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474