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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the claims received on 12/23/2025.
Communications via email (MPEP 502.03)
In order to advance prosecution of the instant application, the Applicants are invited to file a form PTO/SB/439, and to include, in their response, the Applicants’ contact telephone number and e-mail address:
http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-13, 22-26, 28-30, 32-34 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objections and rejections set forth in this office action, and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant’s reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Claim Interpretation
Plain Meaning (MPEP 2111.01): MPEP 2111.01 states: The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification. An applicant is entitled to be their own lexicographer and may rebut the presumption that claim terms are to be given their ordinary and customary meaning by clearly setting forth a definition of the term that is different from its ordinary and customary meaning(s) in the specification at the relevant time. See In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1480, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994). MPEP 2111.01 part III explains that in some cases it is also appropriate to look to how the claim term is used in the prior art, which includes prior art patents, published applications, trade publications, and dictionaries. Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1317, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005). In this case:
“Hardware”: Claim 27 recites the term "hardware". The specification recites the term “hardware” several times, for example on page 5 lines 7, 9, 10, 22, 23, without redefining this term; therefore, it has its original meaning. Therefore, claimed “hardware” excludes transitory embodiments, and doesn’t raise eligibility issues under 35 USC 101.
"Power level information": The Examiner consulted the specification to verify whether there is a definition for "power level information", but there is no such definition. For example, page 2 lines 20, 21: "A communication management resource such as associated with the mobile communication device controls handoff of the mobile communication device from the first wireless access point to a second wireless access point based on the notification (such as power level of the first wireless access point receiving the communications from the mobile communication device)." Page 3 lines 1, 2: "detecting that the power level as indicated by the power information is below a threshold level indicating a poor performance of the communication link". Therefore, claimed "power level information" has its original meaning. None of the embodiments of the specification mentions a "power outage" or " electric power supply"; therefore, "power" means "signal power" without ambiguity. However, the specification does not require claimed "power level information" to be uplink only, or downlink only. See for example page 19 of the specification, lines 8-16: "As previously discussed, the power management resource 151 collects power level information (such as timestamp information associated with a respective measurement, uplink wireless signal strength of the wireless access point 121 receiving the communications 128-1, wireless signal strength of the downlink communications from the wireless access point 121, etc.)."
The independent claims 1, 14, 27 are similar to each other.
Claim 14 is interpreted as follows: 14. A system comprising:
a mobile communication device (this term is not a generic placeholder; the claim limitations as amended are no longer interpreted under 35 USC 112(f)) operative to:
transmit first wireless communications over a first wireless communication link to a first wireless access point via a first wireless communication protocol;
receive power level information (claimed "power level information" is referring to power of a radio frequency signal, not electric power supply; however, claimed "power level information" may be on the uplink or on the downlink), the power level information indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point receiving (the functional language " the first AP receiving…" suggests that the power level is uplink power; however, the claim doesn’t require "uplink power") the first wireless communications from the mobile communication device; and
control handoff of the mobile communication device from the first wireless access point to a second wireless access point based on the power level information.
Claim 27 is interpreted as follows: 27. Computer-readable storage hardware (claimed "hardware" excludes transitory embodiments; therefore, claim 27 is eligible under 35 USC 101) having instructions stored thereon, the instructions, when carried out by computer processor hardware, cause the computer processor hardware to support operations of:
transmitting first wireless communications from a mobile…
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 1 is a method for a user equipment (UE) to perform a handover from a first cell to a second cell, based on a power level. The base station serving the UE monitors a "power level information" received from the UE and reports this value to the UE by sending to the UE a notification with the power information. Despite being power received from the UE, the claim doesn't distinguish whether this power level was originally measured on the uplink, or on the downlink, or both. In other words, the claim doesn't distinguish between uplink power and downlink power. The UE then decides to perform a handover, or not, based on the power level information in the notification. Independent claims 14, 27 are similar to claim 1; claim 14 doesn't require "over the first wireless communication link" required by the second limitation of claims 1 and 27.
The best reference for above-described claim 14 is Chun et al (publication number 2011/0299446), hereinafter Chun. Chun teaches in Fig. 4 a macro BS which serves the UE. While the macro BS is serving the UE, it sends to the UE scheduling information containing uplink power measurements made by the macro BS from the signals transmitted by the UE. The Femto BS is also monitoring the uplink signals from the UE, and when the Femto BS determines that the UE is nearby, it sends a handover initiation message to the serving macro BS. The macro BS sends a scan request message to the UE, containing uplink power measurements made by the femto BS. The UE then decides, based on comparison between the uplink powers, whether to perform a handover to the femto BS, or not.
PNG
media_image1.png
723
605
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Chun teaches that the UE receives power level information from its serving macro base station via scheduling information message S100 represented in Chun Fig. 4, as claim 8 requires. However, Chun falls short of claim 8's requirement that this power level information be relayed by a second device and only then sent to the UE.
Regarding claims 9, 22, 28, 33, Chun teaches that the handover is triggered by a power level sent by a serving base station to a mobile device via scheduling information message; Chun also teaches that an uplink power level is compared against a reference value or a threshold. However, Chun falls short of the power information received at the mobile communication device including an offset value indicating a difference, or any type of combination, between: i) a first wireless power of the first wireless access point receiving uplink wireless signals transmitted from the mobile communication device and ii) a second wireless power of the mobile communication device receiving downlink wireless signals transmitted from the first wireless access point to the mobile communication device.
Regarding claims 10, 11, 23, 24, 29, 30, 34, they depend on claims 9, 22, 28, 33, and incorporate all limitations of claims 9, 22, 28, 33, and therefore present allowable subject matter for the same reasons as claims 9, 22, 28, 33.
Regarding claims 12, 25, these claims require that the power level information be received in response to the UE calling, through its serving AP, an application programming interface (API) at a server resource. Chun, however, is silent with respect to the UE calling an API at a server resource, let alone receiving power level information based on claimed calling step.
Regarding claims 13, 26, these claims repeat the same process as independent claims 1, 14, 27, except at the end of the process of claims 13, 26, they require controlling handoff based on two separate sources of power level information. Chun teaches controlling handoff based on a comparison of uplink power against a threshold which is not the same as either source of information which these claims require.
Regarding claim 32, Chun teaches receiving the power level information at the mobile communication device from a serving macro base station via scheduling information. However, Chun falls short of the mobile communication device communicating with a remote server resource, let alone receiving power level information in response to such communication.
Therefore, in view of their respective base claims, the further limitations of the above-mentioned claims in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, are neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with regards to claims and rejection analysis have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: Applicants argue, on page 13, 3rd par., that the claimed invention includes limitations over the cited prior art and that the combination of references does not render the claimed invention as being obvious. On page 17, 3rd par., Applicants argue that in contrast to the combination of Chun and Files, the claimed invention recites a hierarchical wireless network in which a first group of mobile communication devices wirelessly communicates the first segment of content to each of multiple mobile communication devices in a first group. Applicants argue: "There is no indication that the Brown or Luft teaches or suggests such limitations".
Examiner’s response to Argument 1: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because in response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of Applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which Applicant relies (i.e., “a hierarchical wireless network in which a first group of mobile communication devices wirelessly communicates the first segment of content to each of multiple mobile communication devices in a first group”) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims 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 this case, neither the current nor the previous office action cites Brown of Luft.
Argument 2: Applicants argue, on page 17, 5th par., that the combination of Chun’s implementation of scheduling control user equipment to transmit an uplink direction in view of Files’ implementation of a second wireless application protocol does not teach or suggest a method comprising: via a mobile communication device: transmitting first wireless communications over a first wireless communication link to a first wireless access point via a first wireless communication protocol; receiving power level information indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point receiving the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device over the first wireless communication link; and controlling handoff of the mobile communication device from the first wireless access point to a second wireless access point based on the power level information in a manner as recited by the claimed invention.
Examiner’s response to Argument 2: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because the Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In this case, Chun teaches via a mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52): transmitting first wireless communications (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the UE transmits an "uplink signal" to the macro BS, as described in par. 40) over a first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links) to a first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4); receiving power level information (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: macro BS transmits scheduling information to the UE in step S100; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power) indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) receiving the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the macro BS is receiving the "uplink signal" from the UE, as described in par. 40) over the first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links); and controlling handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170) of the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4) from the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) to a second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) based on the power level information ("scheduling information" in Chun Fig. 4 S100; Chun's handover execution S170 is also based on "scheduling information" S100, because S170 takes place after S100 in the signaling diagram of Fig. 4; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power).
Argument 3: Applicants argue, on pages 18-19, that no new matter was added.
Examiner’s response to Argument 3: The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicants’ argument, because the office action doesn't include a new matter rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 29, 30 are objected to due to the following informalities: Claims 29, 30 recite an "offset value" which refers back to the difference described in claim 28; however, the claim terminology is inconsistent. MPEP 608.01(m) “Form of the Claims” explains that inconsistent terminology should be objected to, and 37 CFR 1.71(a) requires that the specification, including claims, use "full, clear, concise, and exact terms". Therefore, appropriate correction is required. The Examiner recommends reciting the offset value also in claim 28. Appropriate correction is required. The dependent claims incorporate all limitations of the independent claims and intervening claims, and are therefore objected to for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-16, 18, 22-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant) regards as the invention.
MPEP 2173.05(g) "Functional Limitations" explains that the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite. The following factors are considered when examining claims that contain functional language to determine whether the language is ambiguous: (1) whether there is a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter covered by the claim; (2) whether the language sets forth well-defined boundaries of the invention or only states a problem solved or a result obtained; and (3) whether one of ordinary skill in the art would know from the claim terms what structure or steps are encompassed by the claim. In this case, there isn't a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter covered by the claim, and the claim is rendered indefinite. The independent claims recite functional language as follows: “…the first wireless access point receiving the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device over the first wireless communication link”. This functional language provides at least the following possible interpretations of the claims:
1. receiving power level information indicating a wireless power level received by the first wireless access point from the first wireless communications transmitted by the mobile communication device over the first wireless communication link: the specification enables this embodiment in page 19 of the specification, lines 8-16: "As previously discussed, the power management resource 151 collects power level information (such as timestamp information associated with a respective measurement, uplink wireless signal strength of the wireless access point 121 receiving the communications 128-1, wireless signal strength of the downlink communications from the wireless access point 121, etc.).".
2. receiving, by the mobile communication device, power level information indicating a wireless power level transmitted by the first wireless access point ; and receiving, by the first wireless access point, the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device over the first wireless communication link: the specification enables this embodiment also in the page 19 of the specification, in the same lines 8-16: "As previously discussed, the power management resource 151 collects power level information (such as timestamp information associated with a respective measurement, uplink wireless signal strength of the wireless access point 121 receiving the communications 128-1, wireless signal strength of the downlink communications from the wireless access point 121, etc.)."
This ambiguity renders the claims indefinite – see MPEP 2173.02, item I: During examination, after applying the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification to the claim, if the metes and bounds of the claimed invention are not clear, the claim is indefinite and should be rejected. Packard, 751 F.3d at 1311, 110 USPQ2d at 1787: "[W]hen the USPTO has initially issued a well-grounded rejection that identifies ways in which language in a claim is ambiguous, vague, incoherent, opaque, or otherwise unclear in describing and defining the claimed invention, and thereafter the applicant fails to provide a satisfactory response, the USPTO can properly reject the claim as failing to meet the statutory requirements of § 112(b)." The dependent claims incorporate all limitations of the independent claims, and are therefore indefinite for the same reasons. For purposes of examination, the broadest reasonable interpretation is alternative 1. In order to overcome the indefiniteness issue, the Examiner recommends amending the claims as in option 1.
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 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 of this title, 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.
7.20.02.aia Joint Inventors, Common Ownership Presumed
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 at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed 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 at the time a later invention was effectively filed 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1-6, 14-16, 18, 27, 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun et al (publication number 2011/0299446), hereinafter Chun, and further in view of Files et al (publication number 2021/0289413), hereinafter Files.
Chun uses the following terminology:
"Reference value" is the same as "threshold", as described in par. 46-49 in reference to Fig. 4.
User equipment (UE), par. 3, 4.
Macro base station (Macro BS), par. 3, 4.
Femto base station (Femto BS), par. 3, 4.
Regarding claim 1, Chun teaches a method (please refer to Chun Fig. 4, representing a method) comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
723
605
media_image1.png
Greyscale
via a mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52):
transmitting first wireless communications (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the UE transmits an "uplink signal" to the macro BS, as described in par. 40) over a first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links) to a first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4);
receiving power level information (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: macro BS transmits scheduling information to the UE in step S100; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power) indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) receiving the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the macro BS is receiving the "uplink signal" from the UE, as described in par. 40) over the first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links); and
controlling handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170) of the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4) from the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) to a second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) based on the power level information ("scheduling information" in Chun Fig. 4 S100; Chun's handover execution S170 is also based on "scheduling information" S100, because S170 takes place after S100 in the signaling diagram of Fig. 4; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power).
Chun does not explicitly teach claimed "via a first wireless communication protocol".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3):
PNG
media_image2.png
530
744
media_image2.png
Greyscale
via a mobile communication device (Files' "information handling system" is the same as a mobile device, as described in Files' par. 16 in reference to Fig. 1; Files' "information handling system" is represented with numerals 310, 320, 330 in Fig. 3):
transmitting first wireless communications over a first wireless communication link (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: network 300 includes networked mobile information handling systems 310, 320, and 330, and multiple wireless connection link options) to a first wireless access point (Claimed "first wireless access point" equates to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: the APs 315, 325, 335 allow the mobile information handling systems 310, 320, 330 to communicate with the communication networks) via a first wireless communication protocol (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: APs 315, 325, 335 include WI-FI-enabled access point, private and public long-term evolution (LTE)-enabled access points, and 5G new radio (NR)-enabled access points; Files provides examples of wireless protocols in par. 55: wireless protocols network such as a WI-FI network, a private LTE network, a public LTE network; also in par. 65: Wireless communications across wireless local network 340 may be via standard protocols such as IEEE 802.11 WI-FI, IEEE 802.11ad WiGig, IEEE 802.15 WPAN, or 5G small cell WWAN communications such as eNodeB, IEEE 802.11, IEEE 1914/1904, IEEE P2413/1471/42010, APs 315, 325, 335 implementing 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ax IEEE standards, or similar wireless network protocols developed for 5G, LTE, and Wi-Fi).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 2, Chun teaches wherein the second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) supports second wireless communications with the mobile communication device over a second wireless communication link subsequent to the handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170; Fig. 4 S170 "handover execution" is represented as a block connecting the UE to the femto BS, which suggests that the UE will continue to communicate with the Femto BS after the handover execution in step S170, which meets the claim requirement for continuing communications subsequent to the handoff).
Chun does not explicitly teach claimed "via a second wireless communication protocol".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3): wherein the second wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3) supports second wireless communications with the mobile communication device over a second wireless communication link via a second wireless communication protocol (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless communication protocols equate to the wireless communication protocols listed in Files par. 64: WI-FI, LTE, 5G. Files provides examples of wireless protocols in par. 55: wireless protocols network such as a WI-FI network, a private LTE network, a public LTE network; also in par. 65: Wireless communications across wireless local network 340 may be via standard protocols such as IEEE 802.11 WI-FI, IEEE 802.11ad WiGig, IEEE 802.15 WPAN, or 5G small cell WWAN communications such as eNodeB, IEEE 802.11, IEEE 1914/1904, IEEE P2413/1471/42010, APs 315, 325, 335 implementing 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ax IEEE standards, or similar wireless network protocols developed for 5G, LTE, and Wi-Fi) subsequent to the handoff (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, and by enabling inter radio access technology hand-offs, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claims 3, 16, Chun teaches further comprising: initiating the handoff of the mobile communication device from the first wireless access point to the second wireless access point in response to detecting that a magnitude of the wireless power level as indicated by the power level information is below a threshold level (Chun par. 46-49 in reference to Fig. 4: The femto BS transmits a handover initiation message to the macro BS based on a result obtained by comparing the uplink signal's strength with a reference value in step S130. If the uplink signal's strength is greater than the handover threshold, the handover initiation message is transmitted).
Regarding claim 4, Chun teaches wherein the first wireless communication protocol is a Wi-Fi TM communication protocol (Chun par. 3: a network protocol for an IEEE 802.16-based broadband wireless access system; par. 19: WI-FI); and wherein the second wireless access point is a wireless base station residing in a cellular wireless network (Chun par. 19: The technology described below can be used in various wireless communication systems such as code division multiple access (CDMA), frequency division multiple access (FDMA), time division multiple access (TDMA), orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA), single carrier frequency division multiple access (SC-FDMA), etc.)
Regarding claim 5, Chun teaches wherein the first wireless communication link between the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52) and the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) supports conveyance of the first wireless communications (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links); and wherein, subsequent to the handoff, a second wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point supports conveyance of second wireless communications between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170; Fig. 4 S170 "handover execution" is represented as a block connecting the UE to the femto BS, which suggests that the UE will continue to communicate with the Femto BS after the handover execution in step S170, which meets the claim requirement for continuing communications subsequent to the handoff).
Chun does not explicitly teach whether the bands in use are licensed or unlicensed.
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3) wherein, subsequent to the handoff (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa; par. 27, 66: Wireless local network 340 and macro-cellular network 350 may include a variety of licensed, unlicensed or shared communication frequency bands as well as a variety of wireless protocol technologies ranging from those operating in macrocells, small cells, picocells, or femtocells), the first wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the first wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3; par. 64 offers multiple wireless connection link options) utilizes an unlicensed wireless bandwidth to support conveyance of the first wireless communications (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa; par. 27, 66: Wireless local network 340 and macro-cellular network 350 may include a variety of licensed, unlicensed or shared communication frequency bands as well as a variety of wireless protocol technologies ranging from those operating in macrocells, small cells, picocells, or femtocells); and wherein a second wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3; par. 64 offers multiple wireless connection link options) utilizes a licensed wireless bandwidth to support conveyance of second wireless communications between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa; par. 27, 66: Wireless local network 340 and macro-cellular network 350 may include a variety of licensed, unlicensed or shared communication frequency bands as well as a variety of wireless protocol technologies ranging from those operating in macrocells, small cells, picocells, or femtocells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, and by enabling use of both licensed and unlicensed bands, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 6, Chun teaches (please refer to Chun Fig. 7 described in par. 57-60) implementing a communication management function (Chun par. 60 in reference to Fig. 7: functions performed by processor 51) in the mobile communication device (device represented in Chun Fig. 7 described in par. 57-60), the communication management function (functions performed by processor 51 inside the mobile device 50 of Chun Fig. 7) in communication with a power management resource (Macro BS in Chun Fig. 4) to receive the power level information ("scheduling information" in Chun Fig. 4 S100; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power).
Regarding claim 14, Chun teaches a system comprising (please refer to Chun Fig. 4, representing a system formed by a femto BS, a macro BS, and a UE. Par. 25: "mobile communication system"):
a mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52; this amendment overcomes the previous interpretation of claim limitations under 35 USC 112(f)) operative to:
transmit first wireless communications (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the UE transmits an "uplink signal" to the macro BS, as described in par. 40) over a first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links) to a first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4);
receive power level information (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: macro BS transmits scheduling information to the UE in step S100; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power), the power level information indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) receiving the first wireless communications from the mobile communication device (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the macro BS is receiving the "uplink signal" from the UE, as described in par. 40); and
controlling handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170) of the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4) from the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) to a second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) based on the power level information ("scheduling information" in Chun Fig. 4 S100; Chun's handover execution S170 is also based on "scheduling information" S100, because S170 takes place after S100 in the signaling diagram of Fig. 4; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power).
Chun does not explicitly teach claimed "via a first wireless communication protocol".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3):
via a mobile communication device (Files' "information handling system" is the same as a mobile device, as described in Files' par. 16 in reference to Fig. 1; Files' "information handling system" is represented with numerals 310, 320, 330 in Fig. 3):
transmitting first wireless communications over a first wireless communication link (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: network 300 includes networked mobile information handling systems 310, 320, and 330, and multiple wireless connection link options) to a first wireless access point (Claimed "first wireless access point" equates to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: the APs 315, 325, 335 allow the mobile information handling systems 310, 320, 330 to communicate with the communication networks) via a first wireless communication protocol (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: APs 315, 325, 335 include WI-FI-enabled access point, private and public long-term evolution (LTE)-enabled access points, and 5G new radio (NR)-enabled access points; Files provides examples of wireless protocols in par. 55: wireless protocols network such as a WI-FI network, a private LTE network, a public LTE network; also in par. 65: Wireless communications across wireless local network 340 may be via standard protocols such as IEEE 802.11 WI-FI, IEEE 802.11ad WiGig, IEEE 802.15 WPAN, or 5G small cell WWAN communications such as eNodeB, IEEE 802.11, IEEE 1914/1904, IEEE P2413/1471/42010, APs 315, 325, 335 implementing 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ax IEEE standards, or similar wireless network protocols developed for 5G, LTE, and Wi-Fi).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 15, Chun teaches wherein the second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) is operative to support second wireless communications with the mobile communication device subsequent to the handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170; Fig. 4 S170 "handover execution" is represented as a block connecting the UE to the femto BS, which suggests that the UE will continue to communicate with the Femto BS after the handover execution in step S170, which meets the claim requirement for continuing communications subsequent to the handoff).
Chun does not explicitly teach claimed "via a second wireless communication protocol".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3): wherein the second wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3) supports second wireless communications with the mobile communication device over a second wireless communication link via a second wireless communication protocol (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless communication protocols equate to the wireless communication protocols listed in Files par. 64: WI-FI, LTE, 5G. Files provides examples of wireless protocols in par. 55: wireless protocols network such as a WI-FI network, a private LTE network, a public LTE network; also in par. 65: Wireless communications across wireless local network 340 may be via standard protocols such as IEEE 802.11 WI-FI, IEEE 802.11ad WiGig, IEEE 802.15 WPAN, or 5G small cell WWAN communications such as eNodeB, IEEE 802.11, IEEE 1914/1904, IEEE P2413/1471/42010, APs 315, 325, 335 implementing 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ax IEEE standards, or similar wireless network protocols developed for 5G, LTE, and Wi-Fi) subsequent to the handoff (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, and by enabling inter radio access technology hand-offs, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 18, Chun teaches wherein the first wireless communication link between the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52) and the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) supports conveyance of the first wireless communications (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links); and wherein a second wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point supports conveyance of second wireless communications, the second wireless communication link established in response to the handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170; Fig. 4 S170 "handover execution" is represented as a block connecting the UE to the femto BS, which suggests that the UE will continue to communicate with the Femto BS after the handover execution in step S170, which meets the claim requirement for continuing communications subsequent to the handoff).
Chun does not explicitly teach whether the bands in use are licensed or unlicensed.
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3) wherein the first wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the first wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3; par. 64 offers multiple wireless connection link options) utilizes an unlicensed bandwidth to support conveyance of the first wireless communications; and wherein a second wireless communication link between the mobile communication device and the second wireless access point (Claimed "first" and "second" wireless access points equate to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3; par. 64 offers multiple wireless connection link options) utilizes a licensed bandwidth to support conveyance of second wireless communications, the second wireless communication link established in response to the handoff (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa; par. 27, 66: Wireless local network 340 and macro-cellular network 350 may include a variety of licensed, unlicensed or shared communication frequency bands as well as a variety of wireless protocol technologies ranging from those operating in macrocells, small cells, picocells, or femtocells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, and by enabling use of both licensed and unlicensed bands, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 27, Chun teaches (please refer to Chun Fig. 7 described in par. 57-60) computer-readable storage hardware (memory 52) having instructions stored thereon (Chun par. 59: The memory 52 is coupled to the processor 51 and stores an operating system of the UE, applications, and general files. Par. 60: software or program code for performing the functions), the instructions, when carried out by computer processor hardware (processor 51), cause the computer processor hardware (processor 51) to support operations (please refer to Chun Fig. 4, representing a method: method steps are "operations") of:
transmitting first wireless communications (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the UE transmits an "uplink signal" to the macro BS, as described in par. 40) from a mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4) over a first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links) to a first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4);
receiving power level information (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: macro BS transmits scheduling information to the UE in step S100; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power) indicating a wireless power level of the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) receiving the first wireless communications transmitted from the mobile communication device (Chun Fig. 4 S110, where the macro BS is receiving the "uplink signal" from the UE, as described in par. 40) over the first wireless communication link (Chun par. 40 in reference to Fig. 4: "uplink" and "downlink" are examples of wireless communication links); and
controlling handoff (Chun Fig. 4 S170 described in par. 51: the UE is handed over from the macro BS to the femto BS in step S170) of the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4) from the first wireless access point (Macro BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) to a second wireless access point (Femto BS represented in Chun Fig. 4) based on the power level information ("scheduling information" in Chun Fig. 4 S100; Chun's handover execution S170 is also based on "scheduling information" S100, because S170 takes place after S100 in the signaling diagram of Fig. 4; par. 40 explains that the scheduling information includes information about uplink transmit power).
Chun does not explicitly teach claimed "via a first wireless communication protocol".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3):
via a mobile communication device (Files' "information handling system" is the same as a mobile device, as described in Files' par. 16 in reference to Fig. 1; Files' "information handling system" is represented with numerals 310, 320, 330 in Fig. 3):
transmitting first wireless communications over a first wireless communication link (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: network 300 includes networked mobile information handling systems 310, 320, and 330, and multiple wireless connection link options) to a first wireless access point (Claimed "first wireless access point" equates to the APs 315, 325, 335 in Files' Fig. 3; Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: the APs 315, 325, 335 allow the mobile information handling systems 310, 320, 330 to communicate with the communication networks) via a first wireless communication protocol (Files par. 64 in reference to Fig. 3: APs 315, 325, 335 include WI-FI-enabled access point, private and public long-term evolution (LTE)-enabled access points, and 5G new radio (NR)-enabled access points; Files provides examples of wireless protocols in par. 55: wireless protocols network such as a WI-FI network, a private LTE network, a public LTE network; also in par. 65: Wireless communications across wireless local network 340 may be via standard protocols such as IEEE 802.11 WI-FI, IEEE 802.11ad WiGig, IEEE 802.15 WPAN, or 5G small cell WWAN communications such as eNodeB, IEEE 802.11, IEEE 1914/1904, IEEE P2413/1471/42010, APs 315, 325, 335 implementing 802.11b, 802.11a, 802.11g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, and 802.11ax IEEE standards, or similar wireless network protocols developed for 5G, LTE, and Wi-Fi).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Regarding claim 31, Chun teaches at the mobile communication device (UE represented in Chun Fig. 4 described in par. 39-52), initiating a handoff of the mobile communication device from the first wireless access point to the second wireless access point in response to detecting that a magnitude of the wireless power level as indicated by the power level information is below a threshold level (Chun par. 46-49 in reference to Fig. 4: The femto BS transmits a handover initiation message to the macro BS based on a result obtained by comparing the uplink signal's strength with a reference value in step S130. If the uplink signal's strength is greater than the handover threshold, the handover initiation message is transmitted).
Chun does not explicitly teach "wherein the first wireless communication protocol supports conveyance of the first wireless communications over the first wireless communication link in accordance with an unlicensed wireless channel".
Files teaches (please refer to Files Fig. 3) wherein the first wireless communication protocol supports conveyance of the first wireless communications over the first wireless communication link in accordance with an unlicensed wireless channel (Files par. 93: FIG. 9 is a block progression diagram of inter radio access technology (RAT) hand-off process. The inter RAT hand-off process allows hand-offs from a 3G network to a 2G or 4G network or visa-versa; par. 27, 66: Wireless local network 340 and macro-cellular network 350 may include a variety of licensed, unlicensed or shared communication frequency bands as well as a variety of wireless protocol technologies ranging from those operating in macrocells, small cells, picocells, or femtocells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the disclosure of Chun, by deploying Files' information handling system in communication with the AP's, the AP's operating in several different protocols such as WI-FI, LTE, 5G, and by enabling use of both licensed and unlicensed bands, as suggested by Files, in order to offer a communication network that may be better capable of performing a hand-off process relatively more efficient than other types of communication networks; also in order to consign slow-moving vehicles to WI-FI networks, while switching fast-moving vehicles to other networks which are more capable of performing hand-offs, such as LTE (Files par. 17). This motivation is supported by KSR exemplary rationale (G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. MPEP 2141 (III).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD EISNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3334. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Tuesday from 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kathy Wang-Hurst, can be reached at telephone number (571) 270-5371. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RONALD EISNER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights