DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/26/2026 has been entered.
Other prior art
Ji (US-20160338052) [0047] the UE 305 sends an uplink/downlink allocation request message to the BS 300. Upon reception of the allocation request message, at step S320, the BS 300 measures the ratio between uplink traffic and downlink traffic for the UE
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10, 11, 22 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Independent Claims
Claim(s) 1, 18, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501) in further view of Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816).
As to claim 1, 18, 23: Jia teaches a communication system comprising: … ; a network system at least a part of which includes wireless communication (fig.1, 104 network device); and a server that performs data transport with the terminal device through the network system via wireless communication (fig.8, 810 [0027, 56, 59] network server devices), wherein the communication system includes a hardware processor that dynamically controls a transport ratio of an uplink channel to a downlink channel, considering a direction from the terminal device to the server is an uplink channel and a direction from the server to the terminal device is a downlink channel ([0003] In New Radio (NR), often referred to as 5G, a standard (3GPP) defines 56 time-division duplex slot formats depending on downlink/uplink (DL/UL) TDD symbol ratios. Dynamic selection of one of the slot formats allows flexible TDD scheduling operations, in that dynamic selection allows the DL/UL ratio to be adjusted based on current traffic needs, e.g., 3:1 downlink to uplink for a while, then 1:1, and so on),
Jia may not explicitly teach a terminal device including a sensing device. However, Nino teaches a terminal device including a sensing device (fig.6, claim 27, claim 31, claim 32 – plurality of sensors).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement sensors, taught by Nino, into the UE, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and obtain environmental data. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nino in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Jia may not explicitly teach and the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio in response to a request from the terminal device ([0051, 69, 74, 78-80, 87] UE requests a subframe configuration from a negotiating center; [0080-82] UE uses the new subframe configuration), and wherein one or both of: the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger on reception of a notification of completion of data transmission preparation from the server. However, Zarifi teaches and the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio in response to a request from the terminal device ([0051, 69, 74, 78-80, 87] UE requests a subframe configuration from a negotiating center; [0080-82] UE uses the new subframe configuration), and wherein one or both of: the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger on reception of a notification of completion of data transmission preparation from the server ([0027, 69, 87] the present disclosure also provide for changes in the time slot configurations of an individual UE as the UE's traffic load, traffic type or inter-UE communication status changes).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement UE requests and UL-DL configuration changes, taught by Zarifi, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and manage resources efficiently. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Zarifi and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Jia may not explicitly teach and the server notifies the terminal device of data size of data to be transmitted to the terminal device. However, Seo teaches and the server notifies the terminal device of data size of data to be transmitted to the terminal device (abstract).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement data size notification, taught by Seo, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adjust downlink capacity. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Seo and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Dependent Claims
Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, 13, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816) in further view of Hu (US-20140334352).
As to claim 2, 19: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1, 18.
Although Jia teaches adjusting the UL/DL ratio, Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger when an amount of data from the terminal device to the server is larger than an amount of data from the server to the terminal device. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger when an amount of data from the terminal device to the server is larger than an amount of data from the server to the terminal device ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
As to claim 3, 20: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1, 18
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger when an amount of data from the server to the terminal device is larger than an amount of data from the terminal device to the server. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger when an amount of data from the server to the terminal device is larger than an amount of data from the terminal device to the server ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
As to claim 12: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Although Jia teaches server nodes, Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the server generates a control program and/or logical data for operating the terminal device and transmits the control program and/or the logical data to the terminal device. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the server generates a control program and/or logical data for operating the terminal device and transmits the control program and/or the logical data to the terminal device ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment).
. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
As to claim 13: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 12.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger during transmission of the control program and/or the logical data. However, Nagraju teaches wherein the hardware processor adjusts the transport ratio to make a transport amount of the downlink channel larger during transmission of the control program and/or the logical data ([0005] Some embodiments of the base stations may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to downlink transmissions for broadcasting large volumes of data to user equipment or they may allocate larger numbers of TDD subframes to uplink transmissions when receiving a large amount of data from user equipment).
. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement adjusting the UL and DL based on data size, taught by Nagraju, into the UL/DL ratio adjustment, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and adapt data rate to circumstances of the data channel. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Nagraju in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816) in further view of Hong (US-20140233439).
As to claim 7: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device requests. However, Zarifi teaches wherein the terminal device requests ([0079] UE requests a subframe configuration from a negotiating center).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement requesting subframe configuration, taught by Zarifi, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and to configure the UEs subframes . In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Zarifi in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Jia may not explicitly teach to adjust the transport ratio according to the data size. However, Hong teaches to adjust the transport ratio according to the data size ([0041-43] during operation each eNB decides the UL/DL ratio according to a weighted total UL/DL traffic size).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement transport ratio adjustment, taught by Hong, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and make efficient use of scarce radio resources. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Hong in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816) in further view of Torimoto (US-20080275965), Reihman (WO-2017105600-A1).
As to claim 8: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the server notifies the terminal device of viability of suspension of data transmission. However, Torimoto teaches wherein the server notifies the terminal device of viability of suspension of data transmission (abstract If a predetermined code that corresponds with the function of the server is sent back in response to the request (S6), the mobile communication terminal controls whether to continue or suspend the continuous data download in accordance with the code).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement notify viability of suspending data transmission, taught by Torimoto, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and enable UE to suspend data transmission. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Torimoto in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Reihman may not explicitly teach the terminal device includes a storage that stores data, and the terminal device stores data from the sensing device in the storage in a case where data transmission cannot be suspended. However, Reihman teaches the terminal device includes a storage that stores data, and the terminal device stores data from the sensing device in the storage in a case where data transmission cannot be suspended ([0030] While the communication link is unavailable, the sensor may store packets corresponding to analyte sensor measurements, such as CGM data).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement storing data when link unavailable, taught by Reihman, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and prevent data loss. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Reihman in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501) in further view of Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816).
As to claim 9: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger after completion of reception of data transmitted from the server. However, Zarifi teaches wherein the terminal device requests the hardware processor to make a transport amount of the uplink channel larger after completion of reception of data transmitted from the server ([0072, 78-80] UE requests a subframe configuration from a negotiating center).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement UE requests and UL-DL configuration changes, taught by Zarifi, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and manage resources efficiently. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Zarifi and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816), Hu (US-20140334352) in further view of Nagaraju (US-20200012966).
As to claim 14: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 13.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the control program and/or the logical data includes a machine learning algorithm used in the terminal device. However, Nagaraju teaches wherein the control program and/or the logical data includes a machine learning algorithm used in the terminal device ([0023, 34, 118]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement updates through a server, taught by Nagaraju, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and improve functionality and adapt to environmental conditions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nagaraju and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816) in view of Siegel (US-9086941).
As to claim 15: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 12.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the server notifies the terminal device that transmission preparation of the control program and/or the logical data is completed. However, Siegel teaches wherein the server notifies the terminal device that transmission preparation of the control program and/or the logical data is completed (9:20-32 PUSH notification that update is available).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement indication of ready data, taught by Siegel, into the communication system, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and enable a user to prepare for download. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Jia and Siegel in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501), Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816) in further view of Nagaraju (US-20200012966).
As to claim 16: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device and/or the server learns using data obtained by the sensing device and changes a function of the terminal device. However, Nagaraju teaches wherein the terminal device and/or the server learns using data obtained by the sensing device and changes a function of the terminal device ([0004, 34] As a result, the edge devices 12 can learn from their edge data (with the assistance of the server computer system 14) to improve their respective local models 18, to make better predictions used to perform local actions).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement updates through sensor data, taught by Nagaraju, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and improve functionality and adapt to environmental conditions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nagaraju and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia (US-20200099501) in view of Nino (US-20210035067), Zarifi (US-20160182212), Seo (US-20080065816).
As to claim 17: Jia teaches the communication system according to claim 1.
Jia may not explicitly teach wherein the terminal device includes a plurality of the sensing devices. However, Nino teaches wherein the terminal device includes a plurality of the sensing devices (fig.6, claim 27, claim 31, claim 32 – plurality of sensors).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement plurality of sensors, taught by Nino, into the terminal device, taught by Jia, in order to implement a well-known feature of a pre-defined protocol and obtain more accurate environmental data with which to make decisions. In addition, it would have been obvious to combine Nino and Jia in a known manner to obtain predictable results as the combination would not change the essence, quiddity, or functionality of the prior art references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW CHUNG SUK OH whose telephone number is (571)270-5273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12p-8p.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 5712727969. 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.
/ANDREW C OH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights