DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communications filed on September 18, 2025. Claims 29, 30, and 35 have been amended. Claims 18-37 are pending in the application.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 9/18/2025 has been considered.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 18 and 24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,841. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 18 and 24 of the present application are anticipated by claims 1 and 2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,841.
Present application:
18. A computerized method for providing high speed data services to a computerized client device, the computerized method comprising:
providing indoor wireless coverage inside a premises to the computerized client device via a wireless-enabled premises device backhauled by a hybrid fiber coax (HFC) network; and
supplementing the indoor wireless coverage via one or more external access nodes external to the premises, the one or more external access nodes in data communication with the wireless-enabled premises device via an external antenna apparatus.
US 11,736,841:
1. A computerized method of operating a radio frequency (RF) network so that extant infrastructure is used to enable intra-network mobility of a client device, the computerized method comprising:
receiving at least a first portion of the transmitted OFDM waveforms via a premises device disposed at a premises;
[2. The computerized method of claim 1, wherein the extant infrastructure comprises a hybrid fiber coax (HFC) infrastructure]
… receiving at least a second portion of the transmitted OFDM waveforms via a radio device external to the premises, the radio device external to the premises in data communication with the premises device; … causing establishment of a radio frequency connection between the client device and the radio device external to the premises to supplement the radio frequency connection between the client device and the premises device for at least a period of time
24. A computer readable apparatus for use in a fixed wireless apparatus disposed at a user premises, the computer readable apparatus comprising a non-transitory storage medium configured to store one or more computer programs, the one or more computer programs configured to, when executed by a processing apparatus, cause a computerized client device to:
establish a first radio frequency connection between computerized client device and a computerized premises device disposed at a premises; receive at least a portion of first orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms via the first radio frequency connection; and
based on a determination that the first radio frequency connection is at least one of (i) degrading, or (ii) not optimized, establish a second radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and a radio device external to the premises.
1. A computerized method of operating a radio frequency (RF) network so that extant infrastructure is used to enable intra-network mobility of a client device, the computerized method comprising:
receiving at least a first portion of the transmitted OFDM waveforms via a premises device disposed at a premises; … enabling establishment of a radio frequency connection between the client device and the premises device
… determining that the established radio frequency connection is insufficient to meet one or more QoS (quality of service) or QoE (quality of experience) requirements required by the client device; based on the determining, causing establishment of a radio frequency connection between the client device and the radio device external to the premises to supplement the radio frequency connection between the client device and the premises device for at least a period of time
Claims 31-37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 12-14, 18, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,841. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 31-37 of the present application are obvious based on claims 1, 3, 12-14, 18, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,841 in view of Bordner-Babayigit et al. (US 9,088,768).
Present application:
31. A controller apparatus for use within a hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network, the controller apparatus comprising:
a radio frequency (RF) communications management module;
a first data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a network core process;
a second data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a first RF distribution node of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network;
wherein the radio frequency (RF) communications management module comprises computerized logic to enable at least transmission of digital data from at least one of the first RF distribution node or the second RF distribution node with an RF band outside of that normally used by the at least one of the first RF distribution node or the second RF distribution node.
a third data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a second RF distribution node of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network
US 11,736,841:
13. A network architecture configured to support wireless user devices, the network architecture comprising:
the computerized controller apparatus comprising logic configured to effectuate at least one of: (i) handover of the wireless user device at least from the at least one WLAN-compliant user node to the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node; or (ii) creation of simultaneous wireless connections
… computerized controller apparatus in data communication with the at least one WLAN-compliant user node and the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node
a distribution node, the distribution node configured to transmit radio frequency (RF) waveforms onto a wireline or optical medium of a network, the RF waveforms being orthogonal frequency division multiplex (OFDM) modulated;
[18. The network architecture of claim 13, wherein: the network comprise a hybrid fiber coax (HFC) infrastructure operated by a multiple systems operator (MSO); and the at least one WLAN-compliant user node and the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node are each backhauled by the HFC infrastructure.]
at least one wireless local area network (WLAN)-compliant user node in data communication with the wireline or optical medium and comprising a receiver apparatus configured to receive at least a first portion of the transmitted OFDM modulated waveforms
[1. … the computerized method comprising: transmitting OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplexing) waveforms over at least a portion of the extant infrastructure using at least a frequency band wider in frequency than a normal operating band of the extant infrastructure]
Claim 13 does not recite a third data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a second RF distribution node of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network.
However, Bordner-Babayigit teaches a third data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a second RF distribution node of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network (“The system includes a headend for providing video and data to a plurality of subscriber equipment via a hybrid fiber/coax (HFC) network, a plurality of distribution hubs, the plurality of distribution hubs coupling network elements from subscriber equipment to the headend and a storage device” – See col. 2, lines 43-50; Second and third data interfaces with first and second distribution nodes of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network are provided). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 13 to include a third data interface in data communication with the RF communications management module for data communication with a second RF distribution node of the hybrid fiber/coaxial cable distribution network. Motivation for doing so would be to enable a plurality of distributed nodes to connect various segments of the network (See Bordner-Babayigit, Col. 7, lines 58-62).
32. The controller apparatus of claim 31, wherein:
the radio frequency (RF) communications management module comprises a 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (SG NR) gNB (gNodeB) Controller Unit (CU);
the first RF distribution node comprises a first 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) gNB (gNodeB) Distributed Unit (DU); and
the second RF distribution node comprises a second 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) gNB (gNodeB) Distributed Unit (DU).
14. The network architecture of claim 13, wherein the computerized controller apparatus comprises a 3GPP 5G NR (New Radio) compliant central unit (CU), and the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node comprises a 3GPP 5G NR (New Radio) compliant distributed unit (DU).
33. The controller apparatus of claim 31, wherein the first data interface for data communication with the network core process comprises a 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) Xn interface with a 5GC (Fifth Generation Core).
13. … wherein the computerized controller apparatus comprises a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) Xn interface for data communication with a Fifth Generation Core (5GC), and an Internet Protocol (IP) address of the wireless user device is anchored at the 5GC and connected to the Internet over an N6 interface of the 5GC.
34. The controller apparatus of claim 33, wherein the second data interface comprises a 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) F1 interface operative over at least a wireline data bearer medium.
19. The network architecture of claim 13, wherein the computerized controller apparatus further comprises: a 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) F1 interface operative over at least a wireline data bearer medium for data communication with at least one WLAN-compliant user node; and a 3GPP 5G NR F1 interface operative over at least a dense wave division multiplexed (DWDM) optical data bearer for data communication with the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node.
35. The controller apparatus of claim 34, wherein the third data interface includes an Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) F1 interface operative over at least a dense wave division multiplexed (DWDM) optical data bearer.
19. The network architecture of claim 13, wherein the computerized controller apparatus further comprises: a 3GPP Fifth Generation New Radio (5G NR) F1 interface operative over at least a wireline data bearer medium for data communication with at least one WLAN-compliant user node; and a 3GPP 5G NR F1 interface operative over at least a dense wave division multiplexed (DWDM) optical data bearer for data communication with the at least one 3GPP-compliant radio node.
36. The controller apparatus of claim 31, wherein the RF band outside of that normally used by the at least one of the first RF distribution node or the second RF distribution node comprises a frequency band of at least 1.6 GHz in total bandwidth.
3. The computerized method of claim 2, wherein the frequency band wider in frequency than the normal operating band of the extant infrastructure comprises a frequency band of at least 1.6 GHz in total bandwidth
37. The controller apparatus of claim 31, wherein:
the first RF distribution node comprises a wireless local area network (WLAN)- compliant premises device; the second RF distribution node comprises a 3GPP-compliant radio node; and the enablement of at least the transmission of the digital data from the at least one of the first RF distribution node and the second RF distribution node comprises enablement of internetworking between Wi-Fi and 3GPP technologies to maintain session continuity between the WLAN-compliant premises device and the 3GPP-compliant radio node using multiple system operator (MSO)-only control functions.
12. The computerized method of claim 1, wherein: the premises device comprises a wireless local area network (WLAN)-compliant premises device; the radio device external to the premises comprises a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)-compliant radio node; and the common controller apparatus enables internetworking between Wi-Fi and 3GPP technologies to maintain session continuity between the WLAN-compliant premises device and 3GPP-compliant radio node using multiple system operator (MSO)-only control functions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 18, 19, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2013/0223227).
Regarding Claim 18, Lee teaches a computerized method for providing high speed data services to a computerized client device, the computerized method comprising:
providing indoor wireless coverage inside a premises to the computerized client device via a wireless-enabled premises device backhauled by a hybrid fiber coax (HFC) network (“the femto access point, which is the smallest access point from among the access points that have been proposed up to now, provides a communication service to a small number of UEs located within a femto cell area, which is a small-sized communication area, such as an office, a residence, or a building” – See [0004]; “The core network interface unit 321, which is a unit for interfacing between a core network and the femto access point, may employ a wired interface, such as an x Digital Subscriber Line (xDSL) interface, a Hybrid Fiber Coaxial Cable (HFC) interface” – See [0088]; The femto AP (wireless-enabled premises device) provides indoor coverage for the UE (computerized client device) and is backhauled by an HFC interface); and
supplementing the indoor wireless coverage via one or more external access nodes external to the premises, the one or more external access nodes in data communication with the wireless-enabled premises device via an external antenna apparatus (“in order to increase the entire system capacity and improve the service quality, it is an important factor to provide a communication service to a shaded area, since it has a large influence on the expansion of a service area of an access point and the increase of a capacity of the access point. There are various methods of providing a communication service to a shaded area, representative examples of which include a method using a relay station providing an interface for a macro access point and a method using a femto access point” – See [0002]; “the femto access point is a device proposed in order to prevent the occurrence of a shaded area and increase the service capacity as described above” – See [0014]; “the femto access point includes a macro access point/relay station interface unit 311” – See [0085]; “The macro access point/relay station interface unit 311, which is a unit for interfacing between the femto access point and a macro access point” – See [0086]; See also Fig. 7; The macro access point (one or more external access nodes external to the premises) supplements coverage/capacity of the femto access point, wherein the macro access point and femto access point are in communication via external antennas).
Regarding Claim 19, Lee teaches the method of Claim 18. Lee further teaches that the one or more external access nodes comprise one or more access nodes pole-mounted to a premises associated with at least one user of the wireless-enabled premises device (See Fig. 7; The external macro access node is a “pole-mounted” access node).
Regarding Claim 30, Lee teaches the method of Claim 18. Lee further teaches causing the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device to exchange data relating to respective cellular data network capabilities of the computerized client device, the exchange of the data comprising provision of an information element (IE) by the wireless-enabled premises device to the computerized client device, the IE indicating whether any cellular data network connections exist with the computerized client device (“As a result of the identification of the available capacity of the femto access point 1020, when the femto access point 1020 is unable to provide a voice communication service to the UE 1010, the control unit 1040 transmits a UE Release Request message to the FAP-GW 1060 in order to remove the control unit 1040 from the UEs to which the femto access point 1020 provides the femto access point service (step 1059). The UE Release Request message includes a context ID or an IMSI of the UE 1010” – See [0188]; “Further, in order to enable the UE 1010 to receive a service from a macro access point other than the femto access point 1020, the control unit 1040 transmits a downlink data frame to the femto access point unit 1030 (step 1061). The downlink data frame includes information commanding the UE 1010 to handover to a macro access point. Upon receiving the downlink frame from the control unit 1040, the femto access point unit 1030 transmits an RRC Direct Transfer message to the UE 1010 (step 1063). The RRC Direct Transfer message also includes information commanding the UE 1010 to handover to a macro access point” – See [0189]; The femto access point (wireless-enabled premises device) sends information to the UE (computerized client device) indicating that a cellular connection with the femto access point will no longer exist due to handover).
Claims 24, 28, 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Czaja et al. (US 2016/0021595).
Regarding Claim 24, Czaja teaches a computer readable apparatus for use in a fixed wireless apparatus disposed at a user premises, the computer readable apparatus comprising a non-transitory storage medium configured to store one or more computer programs, the one or more computer programs configured to, when executed by a processing apparatus (“Those of skill would further appreciate that the various illustrative logical blocks, modules, and algorithmic steps described in connection with the embodiments disclosed herein may be implemented as electronic hardware, computer software, or combinations of both” – See [0197]; “a software program which may be stored in a memory and is executable by a processor” – See [0053]), cause a computerized client device to:
establish a first radio frequency connection between computerized client device and a computerized premises device disposed at a premises (“Home Access Point—hereinafter referred to collectively as hAP is the home femto-cell equipment providing localized cellular communication services for the wireless terminals inside the house” – See [0058]; “cellular network establishes communication with the mobile terminal using hAP and it's internet connection” – See [0112]; The terminal (computerized client device) establishes a first radio frequency connection with the femto cell/home access point (computerized premises device disposed at a premises));
receive at least a portion of first orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms via the first radio frequency connection (“at time t1 the mobile terminal is within the coverage area of student's home femto-cell (hAP), and communicates with the Home Node hAP 200 over local RF link 211” – See [0090]; “The techniques described herein can be used for various wireless communication systems such as code division multiple access (CDMA), time division multiple access (TDMA), frequency division multiple access (FDMA), orthogonal FDMA (OFDMA)” – See [0010]; The terminal receives OFDM waveforms from the femto cell/home access point via the first radio frequency connection); and
based on a determination that the first radio frequency connection is at least one of (i) degrading, or (ii) not optimized, establish a second radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and a radio device external to the premises (“The operation of the student safety system during the F2MHO (when student leaves his/her home) is presented in FIG. 7A. Here, the mobile terminal 400 continuously monitors the strength the Pilot Channel (PiCH), 220 from the serving femto-cell 200 and the strength of the PiCH 320 of the macro-cell base station then sends those measurements in a measurement message, such as Pilot Strength Measurement Message 410. Such measurements are compared with the predefined thresholds designed to determine the boundary of the femto-cell coverage area. When the PiCH signal 320 is above such predefined threshold and the PiCH signal 220 is below such predefined threshold, a dedicated channel resource is allocated by the macro-cell base station 300 and message instructing to perform “hand-over” (such as adding the macro-cell 300 to the Active Set, etc.) is sent to the mobile terminal. In response, the mobile terminal 400 sends a handover complete message 420” – See [0134]; When the pilot signal strength of the first radio frequency connection with the femto cell/home access point drops below a threshold (degrading/not optimized), the terminal establishes a second radio frequency connection with the macro cell (radio device external to the premises)).
Regarding Claim 28, Czaja teaches the computer readable apparatus of Claim 24. Czaja further teaches that the establishment of the first radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the computerized premises device is initiated by the computerized premises device and based on a detection, by the computerized premises device, of the computerized client device at first location (“in the context of this invention, an in-band message sent by either the mAP or the hAP requesting such information as: request for user present/absent status” – See [0078]; “the hAP sends in-band message to the Control Node, informing of the mobile terminal status (present/absent)” – See [0112]; The first radio frequency connection between the terminal (computerized client device) and the hAP (computerized premises device) is based on detection of the “present” status of the terminal by the hAP at the hAP’s location).
Regarding Claim 29, Czaja teaches the computer readable apparatus of Claim 24. Czaja further teaches that the one or more computer programs are further configured to, when executed by the processing apparatus, cause the computerized client device to: receive, after the establishment of the first radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the computerized premises device, data representative of an instruction from the computerized premises device, the instruction configured to cause the computerized client device to disestablish an initial radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and at least one of (i) the radio device external to the premises or (ii) another radio device external to the premises (“message instructing to perform “hand-over” (such as adding the macro-cell 300 to the Active Set, etc.) is sent to the mobile terminal” – See [0134]; “When both the macro-cell and the hAP receives a HCM, the transmission on the macro-cell DCH is discontinued and “moved” to the hAP Internet interface” – See [0171]; The terminal receives an instruction from the hAP to perform handover from the macro cell to the hAP (i.e., cause the computerized client device to disestablish an initial radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the radio device external to the premises)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2013/0223227) in view of Czaja et al. (US 2016/0021595).
Regarding Claim 20, Lee teaches the method of Claim 18. Lee further teaches that respective radio frequency connections between (i) the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device, and (ii) the wireless-enabled premises device and the one or more external access nodes, enable delivery to the computerized client device of at least a portion of first waveforms received by the wireless-enabled premises device and at least a portion of second waveforms received by the one or more external access nodes (“The UE interface unit 317, which is a unit for interfacing between a UE and the femto access point, may employ a wireless interface, such as an RF interface” – See [0087]; “The macro access point/relay station interface unit 311, which is a unit for interfacing between the femto access point and a macro access point or a relay station, can perform interfacing between the femto access point and a macro access point or a relay station by using a wireless interface, such as a Radio Frequency (RF) interface or a microwave interface” – See [0086]; The femto-UE and femto-macro RF connections enable delivery of first and second RF waveforms to the UE).
Lee does not explicitly teach that the first and second waveforms are orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms.
However, Czaja teaches using OFDM waveforms for wireless communication (“An OFDMA system can implement a radio technology such as Evolved UTRA (E-UTRA), IEEE 802.16 (WiMAX), etc.” – See [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee such that the first and second waveforms are orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms since OFDM is used in well-known and widely-used cellular communication standards such as E-UTRA, WiMAX, and so on (See Czaja, [0010]).
Regarding Claim 21, Lee in view of Czaja teaches the method of Claim 20. Czaja further teaches based on movement of the computerized client device from the inside of the premises to an outside of the premises: terminating the radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device after a radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the one or more external access nodes has been established; and causing all OFDM waveforms destined for the computerized client device to be transmitted to the one or more external access nodes external to the premises (“The operation of the student safety system during the F2MHO (when student leaves his/her home) is presented in FIG. 7A. Here, the mobile terminal 400 continuously monitors the strength the Pilot Channel (PiCH), 220 from the serving femto-cell 200 and the strength of the PiCH 320 of the macro-cell base station then sends those measurements in a measurement message, such as Pilot Strength Measurement Message 410. Such measurements are compared with the predefined thresholds designed to determine the boundary of the femto-cell coverage area. When the PiCH signal 320 is above such predefined threshold and the PiCH signal 220 is below such predefined threshold, a dedicated channel resource is allocated by the macro-cell base station 300 and message instructing to perform “hand-over” (such as adding the macro-cell 300 to the Active Set, etc.) is sent to the mobile terminal. In response, the mobile terminal 400 sends a handover complete message 420” – See [0134]; “we propose to modify the “traditional” SHO—frequently referred as make-before-brake handover, into brake-after-make handover. This handover have two phases: first phase—follows the procedure of “traditional” SHO, where the candidate base station (femto or macro cell), is added to the terminal active set and the Handoff Complete Message (HCM) 420, is sent; and second phase—after HCM is received, the macro-cell BS “moves” the user traffic to the mAP secondary RF interface Common Channel while at the same time terminates his service on the macro-cell dedicated channel” – See [0109]; When the UE leaves the premises, a handover is performed from the femto cell/wireless-enabled premises device to a macro cell, thus terminating the connection between the terminal (computerized client device) and the femto cell (wireless-enabled premises device) and causing the OFDM waveforms to be transmitted to the terminal via the macro cell (one or more external access nodes external to the premises). Furthermore, the handover is a “soft” type handover wherein the original connection is terminated after connection with the target cell is made).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee such that based on movement of the computerized client device from the inside of the premises to an outside of the premises: terminating the radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device after a radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the one or more external access nodes has been established; and causing all OFDM waveforms destined for the computerized client device to be transmitted to the one or more external access nodes external to the premises. Motivation for doing so would be to provide connectivity for a client device when it moves between different wireless coverage areas (See Czaja, [0090]-[0091]).
Regarding Claim 22, Lee teaches the method of Claim 18. Lee does not explicitly teach selecting the one or more external access nodes from a plurality of candidate nodes, the selecting at least based on at least one of (i) spatial or physical location relative to the premises, or (ii) topological location within the HFC network.
However, Czaja teaches selecting the one or more external access nodes from a plurality of candidate nodes, the selecting at least based on at least one of (i) spatial or physical location relative to the premises, or (ii) topological location within the HFC network (“The operation of the student safety system during the F2MHO (when student leaves his/her home)” – See [0134]; See also Fig. 3; A plurality of candidate external access nodes are provided (e.g., macro cell 300, mAP 500, etc.). The selection of the macro cell is based on the physical location of the terminal relative to the premises (i.e., when the user is leaving home)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include selecting the one or more external access nodes from a plurality of candidate nodes, the selecting at least based on at least one of (i) spatial or physical location relative to the premises, or (ii) topological location within the HFC network. Motivation for doing so would be to provide connectivity for a client device when it moves between different wireless coverage areas (See Czaja, [0090]-[0091]).
Regarding Claim 23, Lee teaches the method of Claim 18. Lee does not explicitly teach determining that an established radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device is insufficient to meet one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device; wherein the supplementing of the indoor wireless coverage via the one or more external access nodes external to the premises causes the one or more QoS or QoE requirements to be met.
However, Czaja teaches determining that an established radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device is insufficient to meet one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device; wherein the supplementing of the indoor wireless coverage via the one or more external access nodes external to the premises causes the one or more QoS or QoE requirements to be met (“The operation of the student safety system during the F2MHO (when student leaves his/her home) is presented in FIG. 7A. Here, the mobile terminal 400 continuously monitors the strength the Pilot Channel (PiCH), 220 from the serving femto-cell 200 and the strength of the PiCH 320 of the macro-cell base station then sends those measurements in a measurement message, such as Pilot Strength Measurement Message 410. Such measurements are compared with the predefined thresholds designed to determine the boundary of the femto-cell coverage area. When the PiCH signal 320 is above such predefined threshold and the PiCH signal 220 is below such predefined threshold, a dedicated channel resource is allocated by the macro-cell base station 300 and message instructing to perform “hand-over” (such as adding the macro-cell 300 to the Active Set, etc.) is sent to the mobile terminal. In response, the mobile terminal 400 sends a handover complete message 420” – See [0134]; The terminal determines that pilot strength for the femto cell is below a threshold (i.e., the connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device is insufficient to meet one or more QoS or QoE requirements). Indoor wireless coverage is supplemented by handing the terminal over to the macro cell (external access node) which has a pilot strength above the threshold (i.e., causing the one or more QoS or QoE requirements to be met)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee to include determining that an established radio frequency connection between the computerized client device and the wireless-enabled premises device is insufficient to meet one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device; wherein the supplementing of the indoor wireless coverage via the one or more external access nodes external to the premises causes the one or more QoS or QoE requirements to be met for the same reasons as those given with respect to Claim 22.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Czaja et al. (US 2016/0021595) in view of Brude (US 2019/0303110).
Regarding Claim 25, Czaja teaches the computer readable apparatus of Claim 24. Czaja does not explicitly teach that the computer readable apparatus comprises a cloud-based network storage device which is remote from, yet accessible via the computerized client device.
However, Brude teaches that the computer readable apparatus comprises a cloud-based network storage device which is remote from, yet accessible via the computerized client device (“Moreover, elements of computing environment 100 (e.g., VR development system 110, application servers 120, third-party systems 130, end-user devices 140, network 150, etc.) may each include one or more processors, computer-readable memory, and one or more interfaces, among other features and hardware. Servers may include any suitable software component or module, or computing device(s) capable of hosting and/or serving software applications and services, including distributed, enterprise, or cloud-based software applications, data, and services. For instance, one or more of the described components of computing environment 100, may be at least partially (or wholly) cloud-implemented, “fog”-implemented, web-based, or distributed for remotely hosting, serving, or otherwise managing data, software services, and applications that interface, coordinate with, depend on, or are used by other components of computing environment 100” – See [0030]; The computer readable apparatus includes cloud-based storage).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Czaja such that the computer readable apparatus comprises a cloud-based network storage device which is remote from, yet accessible via the computerized client device. Motivation for doing so would be to enable the computer programs to be distributed for remote hosting (See Brude, [0030]).
Regarding Claim 26, Czaja teaches the computer readable apparatus of Claim 24. Czaja does not explicitly teach that the computer readable apparatus comprises a fog-based storage device which is distributed across multiple nodes of varying proximity and accessible via the computerized client device.
However, Brude teaches that the computer readable apparatus comprises a fog-based storage device which is distributed across multiple nodes of varying proximity and accessible via the computerized client device (“Moreover, elements of computing environment 100 (e.g., VR development system 110, application servers 120, third-party systems 130, end-user devices 140, network 150, etc.) may each include one or more processors, computer-readable memory, and one or more interfaces, among other features and hardware. Servers may include any suitable software component or module, or computing device(s) capable of hosting and/or serving software applications and services, including distributed, enterprise, or cloud-based software applications, data, and services. For instance, one or more of the described components of computing environment 100, may be at least partially (or wholly) cloud-implemented, “fog”-implemented, web-based, or distributed for remotely hosting, serving, or otherwise managing data, software services, and applications that interface, coordinate with, depend on, or are used by other components of computing environment 100” – See [0030]; The computer readable apparatus includes fog-based storage).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Czaja such that the computer readable apparatus comprises a fog-based storage device which is distributed across multiple nodes of varying proximity and accessible via the computerized client device for the same reasons as those given with respect to Claim 25.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Czaja et al. (US 2016/0021595) in view of Ying et al. (US 2015/0148067).
Regarding Claim 27, Czaja teaches the computer readable apparatus of Claim 24. Czaja does not explicitly teach that the first established radio frequency connection and the second established radio frequency connection are maintained simultaneously such that one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device can be met.
However, Ying teaches that the first established radio frequency connection and the second established radio frequency connection are maintained simultaneously such that one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device can be met (“The pico cell may also be used to improve performance of the UE by using the macro cell and pico cell simultaneously, e.g., by carrier aggregation” – See [0003]; “the node may select the active state of the second cell if the performance requirement of the UE, e.g., in terms of data rate, exceeds a threshold. The second cell may then be used to enhance the performance with respect to the UE, e.g., by allowing the UE to utilize the first and second cell simultaneously, e.g., by carrier aggregation” – See [0051]; The first and second radio frequency connections between pico and macro cells are maintained simultaneously to meet performance (QoS/QoE) requirements of the UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Czaja such that the first established radio frequency connection and the second established radio frequency connection are maintained simultaneously such that one or more quality of service (QoS) or quality of experience (QoE) requirements required by the computerized client device can be met. Motivation for doing so would be to provide improved capacity/performance by using the first and second radio frequency connections simultaneously via carrier aggregation (See Ying, [0003]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on September 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 9 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Firstly, the femto/macro architecture disclosed in Lee is a cellular backhaul; the femto access point in Lee is not described as being ‘backhauled by a hybrid fiber coax (HFC) network’ in the sense required by Claim 18 as presented herein. At par. [0088], Lee mentions HFC as one possible interface, but does not teach or suggest a unified architecture where both the indoor premises device and the external access nodes are coordinated over a managed HFC infrastructure as recited in Claim 18 as presented herein. Nowhere that Applicant can find does Lee disclose using HFC to backhaul an in-premises node to the operator network”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. According to the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed “backhaul” is interpreted as including an interface between an access node and a core network. Fig. 3 shows a block diagram of a femto access point (wireless enabled premises device). As shown in Fig. 3, the femto access point includes a core network interface 321, which may include a wired Hybrid Fiber Coaxial Cable (HFC) interface (See [0088]). Thus, Lee teaches “a wireless-enabled premises device backhauled by a HFC network.”
On page 9 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Additionally, the ‘macro access point’ disclosed in Lee is not described as being in ‘data communication with the wireless-enabled premises device via an external antenna apparatus.’ Rather, Lee describes a conventional macro/femto handover with a generic UE macro interface, not a coordinated supplementing of coverage via an external node that is in direct data communication with the premises device as required by Claim 18 as presented herein. Nowhere does Lee disclose any ‘external antenna apparatus’ that couples a premises device to an external access node as recited in Claim 18 as presented herein.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 18 does not recite the specific location or nature of the “external antenna apparatus.” The only details given in claim 18 are that the external antenna apparatus is part of the interface between the external access node and the wireless-enable premises device. Thus, a macro cell (external access node) that uses one of its antennas (external antenna apparatus) to communicate with a femto cell (wireless-enable premises device) meets the claim limitation “the one or more external access nodes in data communication with the wireless-enabled premises device via an external antenna apparatus.” Lee shows such a feature wherein the macro AP uses its antenna to communicate with the femto AP (“the macro access point/relay station interface unit 311 first receives a downlink signal targeting a UE from a macro access point or a relay station” – See [0096]; See also Fig. 2).
On page 9 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Moreover, Lee does not recognize the MSO/HFC-specific problem solved by Claim 18 as presented herein. Applicant’s specification as filed addresses an MSO-operated HFC environment in which indoor coverage delivered by a premises device backhauled over HFC must be supplemented in the immediate outdoor footprint by externally located access nodes that are in data communication with the premises device via an external antenna apparatus, while preserving session continuity across the indoor/outdoor boundary - without involving an MNO or conventional marco ↔ femto mobility. See, e.g., the Abstract and ‘Overview’ section of Applicant’s specification as filed, describing MSO-only, HFC-backhauled premises service supplemented by external/pole-mounted radios (and session continuity) and the explicit statement that supplementation is "communicative with the CPE via an external antenna apparatus," optionally with MSO-only control.”
In response to Applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “an MSO-operated HFC environment”, “preserving session continuity across the indoor/outdoor boundary - without involving an MNO or conventional marco ↔ femto mobility”, “MSO-only, HFC-backhauled premises service supplemented by external/pole-mounted radios (and session continuity)”, etc.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
On page 10 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Under In re Sponnoble, 405 F.2d 578, 585 (CCPA 1969), non-obviousness can rest on the inventor’s recognition of the source/nature of the problem when the prior art did not perceive it. Lee is directed to conventional cellular macro/femto mobility and does not identify the MSO/HFC problem of augmenting an HFC-backhauled premises node with MSO-managed external nodes coupled to the premises device via an external antenna apparatus to preserve indoor/outdoor continuity and QoE. Applicant’s specification as filed repeatedly frames that exact MSO/HFC supplementation problem and solution (HFC backhaul; external/pole-mounted radios; direct external data coupling; session continuity). Any modification of Lee to arrive at (a) premises an HFC-backhauled premises device, plus (b) MSO-managed external nodes in data communication with the premises device via an external antenna apparatus, would require hindsight reconstruction to solve a problem Lee never recognized.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) for being anticipated by Lee. Since Lee anticipates claim 18, it does not rely on a combination of references or any sort of hindsight (permissible or otherwise) reconstruction to arrive at a conclusion of obviousness. Furthermore, a prior art reference does not need to address a specific problem that was addressed by the inventors in the present application. As long as the prior art reference teaches each and every one of the claim limitations, then the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 is proper.
On page 11 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Although Czaja references OFDM in par. [0010] (‘techniques described herein can be used for various wireless communication systems such as … OFDMA …’ and generally discloses handover between femto and macro cells. However, Czaja does not disclose the specific use of ‘first orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) waveforms’ received via the first RF connection and the conditional establishment of a second RF connection based on a determination that the first connection is ‘degrading or not optimized,’ as recited in Claim 24 as presented herein. Czaja’s handover logic is based on pilot strength thresholds (see par. [0134]), not on a dynamic, protocol-agnostic assessment of connection optimization as claimed.
Czaja’s detailed embodiment is UMTS/WCDMA; the Office’s reliance on a generic disclosure in Czaja that ‘[a]n OFDMA system can implement …’ (par. [0010] thereof) to retrofit OFDM into Czaja is not a proper § 102 basis. Anticipation for Claim 24 as presented herein would require that the reference itself disclose receiving OFDM waveforms over the first in-premises link, which is wholly absent from Czaja.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Although Czaja gives a detailed embodiment including the use of UMTS/WCDMA, Czaja also discloses that the techniques described herein can be used in various other wireless communication systems, such as ODFM (See [0010]). Thus, it is clear that the techniques and steps disclosed by Czaja apply to various other types of wireless communication (including OFDM), and not just a single type of wireless communication given from a single embodiment.
On pages 11-12 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Additionally, the claimed apparatus of Claim 24 as presented herein requires logic that is executed by the client device to determine degradation and initiate the second connection. The system in Czaja is network-centric (femto/macro RRC messages, thresholds) and relies on network-side triggers; Czaja does not teach or suggest the client-side logic as required by Applicant’s Claim 24.
Yet additionally, Claim 24 as presented herein requires the second RF connection to be established with a ‘radio device external to the premises,’ with a specific architecture. Czaja’s macro cell is not described as a ‘radio device external to the premises’ in direct communication with the client device in the manner required by Claim 24 as presented herein.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 24 recites that the client device is configured to “establish a second radio frequency connection” … “based on a determination that the first radio frequency communication is at least one of (i) degrading, or (ii) not optimized.” The claim is ambiguous as to which device is performing the “determination”. Thus, the claim does not necessarily require that the determination is made using “client-side logic”.
Furthermore, Czaja’s macro cell is shown to be a radio device external to the premises in at least Fig. 2 of Czaja where macro cell 300 is shown as being external to a premises/home.
On page 12 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Moreover, Czaja doesn’t recognize the KPI/QoE-driven, client-side mobility problem in an HFC/OFDM premises context solved by Claim 24 as presented herein. Applicant’s specification as filed addresses a client-experience/QoE problem arising when a UE is receiving OFDM waveforms from a premises device (HFC-fed) and the first UE ↔ premises connection becomes ‘degrading’ or ‘not optimized.’ The recognized solution is policy-/KPI-driven mobility that causes the client device itself to establish a second RF connection to an external radio, optionally maintaining simultaneous links, to keep QoS/QoE within target thresholds. See the text of Claim 24 as presented herein (receive OFDM via the first connection; upon ‘degrading/not optimized,’ establish a second connection to an external radio) and the detailed disclosure in Applicant’s specification as filed on detecting client-connection degradation, identifying candidate external nodes, and KPI/QoE triggers (throughput, latency, PER, etc.) rather than mere pilot/strength thresholds.” On page 12, Applicant further argues “Czaja addresses conventional cellular handover logic and does not identify the premises-context OFDM/QoE degradation problem recognized here - namely, UE-initiated establishment of a second connection to an outdoor radio when a first UE ↔ premises link (delivering OFDM from an HFC-backhauled premises node) is ‘degrading/not optimized,’ with decisions driven by KPI/QoE rather than signal-strength alone. Applicant’s specification as filed teaches this exact problem/solution space - detecting degradation, ranking/choosing candidate external nodes, triggering mobility on KPI/QoE, and even maintaining concurrent links - which Czaja does not contemplate. Thus, even if Czaja is combined with other teachings, it would not have suggested this client-experience problem or the specific client-caused second-link establishment in an HFC/OFDM premises setting without hindsight.”
In response to Applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “KPI/QoE triggers” to determine that the first connection is degrading/not optimized, optionally maintaining simultaneous links, to keep QoS/QoE within target thresholds, etc.) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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). It is generally known in the art that examining various signal quality measurements and comparing them to thresholds is one way of determining that a connection is degraded/not optimized (e.g., the quality is below a threshold). Thus, Czaja’s method of comparing pilot strength measurements to a predefined threshold is a way of determining that the first connection is degraded or not optimized.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-37 are allowable over the prior art.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 Scott M Sciacca whose telephone number is (571)270-1919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
/SCOTT M SCIACCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights