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 .
Claims 1-9 are pending.
Amendments of 6/1/2026 are entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments directed to the amendments of 06/01/2026 has been fully considered.
Applicant alleges the references of record, do not disclose "the first control information ... including uplink user data from the terminal to the base station," as newly amended, with Applicant stating Eyuboglu merely discusses transmission of control signals and not user data for uplink traffic.
The examiner asserts Applicant’s reading of the amendment is not consistent with that the claim language actually states.
The amendment sentence fully reads as followed: “wherein the first control information includes a transmission time period of uplink traffic including uplink user data from the terminal to the base station”.
Based on grammatical context (includes vs. including) and placements, the phrase “including uplink user data” clearly modifies the uplink traffic, not the first control information. Therefore, the claim requires the uplink traffic to include uplink user data, which is different from Applicant’s own reading that the first control information includes the UL user data.
Most importantly: The Specification itself never mentions user data or where it is encoded. In fact the language user data (or any equivalent suggesting user data distinct from control information) simply does not exist in the Specification, left alone the specificity of including such user data being encapsulated in a uplink control information. Nor does the Specification mention the uplink traffic includes user data. In fact, the Specification is rather modest when it comes to mentioning of specific contents of uplink data. At best it states “the wireless environment of the terminal 300 can be optimized. Therefore, even in a use case where the uplink traffic from the terminal 300 is the main communication, deterioration of throughput can be curbed” (¶0152 of published Specification). That simply does not support Applicant’s reading that control information somehow includes uplink user data. It also does not support specifically that uplink data includes user data. Applicant has criticized reference Eyuboglu for limiting uplink data to only control data (when Eyuboglu in fact is silent any exclusion), but Applicant’s own Specification provides no better coverage in written support.
Regardless, the rejection(s) have been updated to reflect the inclusion of the amendment below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 9 are amended to recites “wherein the first control information includes a transmission time period of uplink traffic including uplink user data from the terminal to the base station”.
A review of the Specification shows that the Specification itself never explicitly mentions user data specifically, or in any manner that distinguishes itself from control data. In fact the term user data (or any equivalent suggesting user data distinct from control information) simply does not exist in the disclosure, left alone the specificity of including such user data in a uplink control information. The Specification also fails to mention the uplink traffic includes user data. In fact, the Specification at best it states “the wireless environment of the terminal 300 can be optimized. Therefore, even in a use case where the uplink traffic from the terminal 300 is the main communication, deterioration of throughput can be curbed” (¶0152 of published Specification). That simply does not support Applicant’s reading that control information somehow includes uplink user data. It also does not support specifically that uplink data includes user data. Dependent claims thus fall together with their respective base claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2013/0279438) in view of Eyuboglu (US 11,375,527) and in further view of Merlin et al. (US 2015/0016268).
As to claims 1 and 8:
Kwon discloses:
A wireless communication management apparatus (¶0009, a wireless network access point with processor/memory) comprising processing circuitry configured to:
receive first wireless environment information from a terminal configured to wirelessly communicate with a base station; (¶0048, the AP requests and receives RF environment reports from its associated stations with information regarding the RF environments in the area)
generate first control information of the terminal based on the first wireless environment information; (¶0050-0051, 0054, on the basis of the report, the AP generates control information for use by the stations and to be sent to the stations)
transmit the first control information to update a setting of the terminal, the first control information includes a transmission time period between the base station and the terminal. (¶0051-0055, the AP transmitting the generated control information, which includes at least an adjusted transmission timing or a transmission timing offset period to the stations, which per 0069-0070 causes the stations to adjust their timing configuration to adapt to new timing of the AP)
Kwon however does not explicitly state said control information to update a setting of the terminal includes a transmission time period of uplink (UL) traffic from the terminal to the base station.
However, feedback-based management including reconfiguration of UL is also well-established in the art, as evidenced by Eyuboglu’s disclosure as discussed below:
Eyuboglu, in a related field of feedback-based transmission update, discloses in at least Abstract, Col. 97, lines 1-30, 50-60, wherein the network obtains measurement reports from the UE indicative of network conditions (CRI/CQI/PMI/RSRP), and in response, the serving network node performs updates to time/frequency resources used by the UE, in which the serving network node sends UL timing adjustment information to the UE to reconfigure/optimize the UE’s timing advance, i.e. updating a setting of the UE with an updated UL timing data which changes UL transmissions’ timing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the feed-back based transmission reconfiguration system of Kwon can also incorporate Eyuboglu to cover both DL and UL transmissions. Both Kwon and Eyuboglu are concerned with timing adjustments between network and user devices, and by adjusting timing both DL and UL sides of the system, the combination advantageously provides optimizations of timing for better collaboration between the network elements.
Regarding:
The uplink traffic including uplink user data, and wireless communication between the base station and the terminal is compliant with IEEE 802.11 ah.
Kwon discloses the wireless communication between the base station and the terminal is compliant with IEEE 802.11 (See ¶029, 0030, 0033), however is silent on a specific version of 802.11, namely ‘ah’. Eyuboglu discloses scheduling of uplink traffic by the network, however is open-ended on the content of uplink traffic.
Merlin, in same field of WLAN transmission management, discloses a system/method for dynamic adaptation of transmission with IEEE 802.11 family, and specifically 802.11 ah protocol (See at least ¶0027, 0033). Merlin also in ¶0050 states transmission from UE/STA to base station as UL traffic, and ¶0078 for granting schedule slot for UL, and in ¶0005, Merlin specifically defines information transmitted/received by the devices (i.e. including uplink information) including packets wherein such packets include both control information as well as user data, ¶0043, STA to transmit data such as voice data (i.e. user data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that Kwon’s 802.11 system can be implemented in any specific sub-version, such as the 802.11 ‘ah’ based on a specific targeted design and benefit. Merlin in at least ¶0027 discloses a benefit of the 802.11 ah as having an extended band (i.e. sub-1 GHz bands), thus extending resources range and bandwidth of the system with vastly larger range (specification of 1km range) as compared to a few hundred meters range of other version such as n/ac/ax etc. Furthermore, as both Kwon and Merlin involves adjustment of network parameters to optimize QoS, it is rather natural that QoS refers to data related to user (i.e. service/application).
Claim 8 is directed to a wireless communication method with steps performed as similar to the apparatus of claim 1 and is rejected by the same reasoning.
Claim 9 is directed to a non-transitory CRM (i.e. memory of the wireless network controller in Liu) with a program causing a computer to perform a process with steps similar to those performed in the device of claim 1 and thus is rejected by the same reasoning.
As to claim 2:
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu discloses all limitations of claim 1, wherein the wireless communication management apparatus is configured to specify the terminal as a management target before receiving the first wireless environment information. (Kwon, ¶0069, 0065, the station(s) (UE) considered by the access point as a target for configuring/reconfiguration by virtues of the commands to scan, report, and adjust settings.)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2013/0279438) in view of Eyuboglu (US 11,375,527) and in further view of Merlin et al. (US 2015/0016268) and in view of Su et al. (CN 102014445).
As to claim 3:
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu discloses all limitations of claim 1, however is silent on the wireless communication management apparatus is configured to: generate a command to restart the updated terminal; and connect communication with the restarted terminal.
Su, in a related field of reconfiguring a UE in a wireless network discloses in at least ¶0125 that a controller device to reconfigure a UE, and transmits a control message to restart the UE and connect communication with the restarted the terminal (i.e. “starts receiving the measurement report sent by the UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the wireless communication management apparatus of Kwon in view of Merlin is configured transmits a control message to restart the UE and connect communication with the restarted the terminal. This implementation is intuitive and advantageous as it allows the existing processes/computation to be refreshed and implemented with the brand new configurations, avoiding stale data.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2013/0279438) in view of Eyuboglu (US 11,375,527) and in further view of Merlin et al. (US 2015/0016268) in view of Su et al. (CN 102014445) in view of Roddy et al. (CN 103650633).
As to claim 4:
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu in view of Su discloses all limitations of claim 3, but is/are silent on the connecting includes connecting by a secure shell (SSH).
Roddy, in a related field of routing traffic across core network and access network entities, discloses in at least ¶0052 that SSH is among possible choices to be implemented for routing information between edge network nodes and core network.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the backhaul information exchange Kwon’s combination to be implemented with SSH. This implementation advantageously exploits various beneficial features of SSH: security (data is well encrypted and unmodifiable during transmission), easily upgradable/reconfigurable as needed.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2013/0279438) in view of Eyuboglu (US 11,375,527) and in further view of Merlin et al. (US 2015/0016268) in view of Lin (US 2011/0194527).
As to claim 5.
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu discloses all limitations of claim 1, and regarding:
the reception unit is configured to receive second wireless environment information from a relay base station configured to wirelessly communicate between the base station and the terminal, the generation unit is configured to generate each of the first control information and second control information of the relay base station based on the first wireless environment information and the second wireless environment information, and the transmission unit is configured to transmit the second control information to update a setting of the relay base station.
Known, discloses the controller to receive the controller to receive multiple measurement reports by the UEs (¶0048, multiple reports reports) and by each round of reports, it is configured to send new reconfigurations to update the UE. Note that the UE discussed is representative for typical multiple UEs in a real world scenario (i.e. a cell serves multiple UEs, not just one single UE).
Except that Liu, does not explicitly disclose, among these UEs, a given UE can connect to the cell via another UE that acts the relay base station.
Lin, in a related field of endeavor, discloses in ¶0026 that the wireless network can also include relay base stations. “A relay base station (also called a relay station) is a station that receives a transmission of data and/or other information from an upstream station (e.g., an eNodeB, a UE, or the like) and sends a transmission of the data and/or other information to a downstream station (e.g., another UE, another eNodeB, or the like). A relay station may also be a UE that relays transmissions for other UEs. In the example shown in FIG. 1, a relay station 110r may communicate with the eNodeB 110a and a UE 120r, in which the relay station 110r acts as a relay between the two network elements (the eNodeB 110a and the UE 120r) in order to facilitate communication between them. A relay station may also be referred to as a relay eNodeB, a relay, and the like.”, and thus any two UEs in Liu’s network can be served and reconfigured by the network controller, while one connects to the cell via the other UE that acts as a relay station (in case of bridge connection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the system of Kwon’s combination, where two served UEs can be in such a bridge connection. This bridge implementation can be advantageous in case where UEs are located at cell’s boundary where coverage might be unstable, bridge connection to a UE with better connection allow boundary UEs to communicate and reconfigured by the network controller in the same reliability as other UEs in inner areas of the cell.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (US 2013/0279438) in view of Eyuboglu (US 11,375,527) and in further view of Merlin et al. (US 2015/0016268) in view of Li (US 2017/0367116).
As to claim 6:
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu discloses all limitations of claim 1, with measurement reports with the wireless environment information (¶0048) however is silent on the first wireless environment information includes a remaining capacity of a battery of the terminal.
Li, in a related field of endeavor, discloses a complete measurement report with RSSI, RSRP, and even battery level of UE (¶0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the measurement report of Kwon to include a full spectrum of various measured parameter including RSSI and battery level. Such implementation allows the network controller to have a full spectrum of information pertaining the RF environment as well local context of the UE (battery) so as to formulate a configuration tailored to the specific situation of the UE, for example to save battery (¶0044, 0045 of Li).
As to claim 7:
Kwon in view of Merlin and Eyuboglu discloses all limitations of claim 1, with measurement reports with the wireless environment information including signal strength (¶0048) however is silent wherein the signal strength includes a received signal strength indication (RSSI) observed by the terminal.
Li, in a related field of endeavor, discloses a complete measurement report with RSSI, RSRP, and even battery level of UE (¶0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that the measurement report of Kwon to include a full spectrum of various measured parameter including RSSI and battery level. Such implementation allows the network controller to have a full spectrum of information pertaining the RF environment as well local context of the UE (battery) so as to formulate a configuration tailored to the specific situation of the UE (¶0044, 0045 of Li).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2012/0008524 - A user equipment for obtaining data for observing performance related to Random Access in a cellular radio system is provided. The user equipment can connect to the system. In order to provide the network/system with data for observing the random access procedure the user equipment measures and stores data needed to compute measurements to be reported to the system. The user equipment further generates a measurement report, and transmits the measurement report based on a trigger event.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights