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 .
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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/3/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/3/26 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments, starting on page 6, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not disclose “receiving network events from one or more access nodes” nor “analyzing the network events.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Atawia in paragraph 45 discloses that the controller receives information about whether various parameter thresholds are met. The language “receiving network events” is broad such that one of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably interpret the meeting of said thresholds as a network event and the reception of information used to determine whether those thresholds are met as receiving the network events. Thus, Atawia does teach this feature of the claim.
Regarding claim 1, applicant also argues that the prior art of record does not disclose “receiving… a current type of service.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The technique in Atawia is for use with URLLC, as discussed in paragraph 40 and throughout Atawia. URLLC is a type of service, and thus the technique being used based on the traffic being URLLC could reasonably be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as corresponding to the cited feature in the instant claim. Thus, Atawia does disclose this feature of the instant claim.
Applicants remarks regarding the other claims are based on similarity or dependence and are thus respectfully disagreed with for similar reasons to the arguments regarding claim 1.
Thus, the prior art of record does teach all the features of the instant claims.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atawia (US 20240107392 A1) in view of Curcio (US 20120009890 A1) and further in view of Kumar (US 20220330112 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Atawia discloses:
“A method comprising: receiving, from multiple types of wireless device… performance parameters, and a current type of service;” ([para 0040]: “Via the KPIs, in FIG. 3, operation 302 the controller monitors control channel capacity and coverage (aggregation level and search space utilization) of the serving cell for all the moving UEs with (e.g., URLLC) traffic.” ; [para 0041]: “For a skipped handover UE, at operation 306 the controller requests average uplink KPIs (SINR, BLER and throughput) of all neighboring cells detected by the UE (using measurement reports).”)
“monitoring the performance parameters over time for the multiple types of wireless devices experiencing a handover triggering event; storing the performance parameters for the multiple types of wireless devices; … receiving network events from one or more access nodes; analyzing the network events and the stored performance parameters including the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices to formulate handover plans for the multiple types of wireless devices for at least one type of service being utilized; and” ([para 0044]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the UE 422 to the serving cell 408, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, an existing 3GPP handover event (e.g., A2 or A4) is used to trigger the uplink-aware and control channel-aware skip handover.” ; [para 0026]: “The UE device 122 can be one type of any number of (e.g., URLLC) devices, including, but not limited to medical-related devices, vehicles, sensors, small measuring devices and so forth, which can be moving at relatively high speeds, e.g., on drones, mobile robots and so forth.” ; [para 0045]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the neighboring cell(s) 440 to the controller 402, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, the controller 402 collects the PDCCH discontinuous transmission (DTX) data of the current cell to ensure that it is lower than a certain threshold (e.g., 1%) that secures the coverage needed to maintain the reliability KPI; (note that the uplink SINR data is also collected from the neighboring cells 440 and the serving cell 408). In addition to checking the DTX data, the CCE utilization is collected and checked to ensure that the serving cell has better control channel utilization to schedule the URLLC data which is needed to satisfy the delay requirements.”)
“generating the handover plans corresponding to the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices utilizing a particular type of service.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “route information” nor “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices.”
However, Curcio discloses the missing feature “route information” ([para 0062]: “In some examples, the mobile terminal 10 provides information indicative of the mobile terminal's current location, direction or trajectory, and/or the like.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Curcio, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Curcio. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Curcio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Atawia in view of Curcio also does not disclose “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices”
However, Kumar discloses the missing feature “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices” ([para 0038]: “In contrast to the previous 3GPP standards-based example, embodiments herein provide that management system 102 can be configured with different handover profiles in which each handover profile can be configured such that it is suited for a specific type of device and the application(s) operating on the type of a device, including QoS levels that may be involved for various application(s) operating on the different types of devices.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Kumar, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize device type-based profiles as disclosed by Kumar. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices type, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Kumar to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 2, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “wherein the particular type of service is voice over new radio (VoNR)” ([para 0001]: “In order to meet such challenging requirements during mobility, an advanced new radio (e.g., fifth generation, or ‘5G’, and beyond) network typically triggers handovers to ensure that the URLLC device is connected to the best serving cell.” Wherein the examiner takes official notice that voice over 5G NR is well known in the art.)
Regarding claim 3, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “monitoring the performance parameters for a route identified by the route information.”
However, Curcio discloses the missing feature “monitoring the performance parameters for a route identified by the route information.” ([para 0062]: “In some examples, the mobile terminal 10 provides information indicative of the mobile terminal's current location, direction or trajectory, and/or the like.” ; [para 0069]: “Based on these factors, and/or other information such as historical route information or route guidance information for a route currently being guided, the congestion map server 64 may determine the projected route. The congestion map server 64 may then also extract the estimated channel capacity for each future location along the projected route, e.g., at a predetermined distance or time interval.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Curcio, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Curcio. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Curcio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 4, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “wherein the route information comprises a location of the wireless device, a speed of the wireless device and a direction of the wireless device.”
However, Curcio discloses the missing feature “wherein the route information comprises a location of the wireless device, a speed of the wireless device and a direction of the wireless device.” ([para 0057]: “The current indications, as mentioned above, may include the current location, speed of motion, direction of motion, historical information, route guidance information and/or other available information.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Curcio, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize speed and direction as disclosed by Curcio. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Curcio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 5, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “wherein the handover triggering event is based on a signal quality threshold.” ([para 0044]: “Examples of such A2 or A4 events include when the serving cell RSRP/RSRQ is below a threshold value, or when the neighbor's RSRP/RSRQ becomes better than a threshold value.”)
Regarding claim 9, Atawia discloses:
“Amended) A method comprising: receiving, at a modular intelligence manager, a wireless device type, a current service being utilized… from a wireless device experiencing a handover triggering event based on a stored handover threshold; receiving, at the modular intelligence manager, network events from one or more access nodes;” ([para 0044]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the UE 422 to the serving cell 408, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, an existing 3GPP handover event (e.g., A2 or A4) is used to trigger the uplink-aware and control channel-aware skip handover.” ; [para 0045]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the neighboring cell(s) 440 to the controller 402, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, the controller 402 collects the PDCCH discontinuous transmission (DTX) data of the current cell to ensure that it is lower than a certain threshold (e.g., 1%) that secures the coverage needed to maintain the reliability KPI; (note that the uplink SINR data is also collected from the neighboring cells 440 and the serving cell 408). In addition to checking the DTX data, the CCE utilization is collected and checked to ensure that the serving cell has better control channel utilization to schedule the URLLC data which is needed to satisfy the delay requirements.”)
“determining, at the modular intelligence manager, based on the route information report, the network events and stored intelligence, whether to override or approve a handover, the stored intelligence including multiple wireless device profiles…” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “a route information report, the route information report including a location, a direction, and a velocity”.
However, Curcio discloses the missing feature ““a route information report, the route information report including a location, a direction, and a velocity”. ([para 0062]: “In some examples, the mobile terminal 10 provides information indicative of the mobile terminal's current location, direction or trajectory, and/or the like.” ; [para 0069]: “Based on these factors, and/or other information such as historical route information or route guidance information for a route currently being guided, the congestion map server 64 may determine the projected route. The congestion map server 64 may then also extract the estimated channel capacity for each future location along the projected route, e.g., at a predetermined distance or time interval.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Curcio, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Curcio. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Curcio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Atawia in view of Curcio also does not disclose “each wireless device profile corresponding to one of multiple types of wireless devices, the stored intelligence further including handover plans corresponding to the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices utilizing a particular type of service.”
However, Kumar discloses the missing feature “each wireless device profile corresponding to one of multiple types of wireless devices, the stored intelligence further including handover plans corresponding to the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices utilizing a particular type of service.” ([para 0038]: “In contrast to the previous 3GPP standards-based example, embodiments herein provide that management system 102 can be configured with different handover profiles in which each handover profile can be configured such that it is suited for a specific type of device and the application(s) operating on the type of a device, including QoS levels that may be involved for various application(s) operating on the different types of devices.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Kumar, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize device type-based profiles as disclosed by Kumar. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices type, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Kumar to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 14, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “further comprising determining that the wireless device is utilizing a particular type of service.” ([para 0038]: “In one step, the (e.g., URLLC) traffic with potential skip handover is identified by one or a combination of packet size and inter-arrival rate, the number of resource blocks needed for scheduling PDSCH, and/or the specified delay requirements defined in the 5G quality-of-service (QoS) identifier (5QI).”)
Regarding claim 15, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “wherein particular type of service is voice over new radio (VoNR) and based on the determination that the service is VoNR, determining whether to override or approve the handover” ([para 0001]: “In order to meet such challenging requirements during mobility, an advanced new radio (e.g., fifth generation, or ‘5G’, and beyond) network typically triggers handovers to ensure that the URLLC device is connected to the best serving cell.” ; [para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.” ; [para 0051]: “Thus, the UE can potentially skip handover if the Ultx is less than a predefined maximum threshold.” Wherein the examiner takes official notice that voice over 5G NR is well known in the art.)
Regarding claim 16, Atawia discloses:
“A modular intelligence manager comprising: a memory storing instructions; and a processor executing the stored instructions to perform operations including:” ([para 0059]: “One or more aspects can be embodied in network equipment, such as represented in the example operations of FIG. 9, and for example can include a memory that stores computer executable components and/or operations, and a processor that executes computer executable components and/or operations stored in the memory.”)
“receiving, from multiple types of wireless devices… performance parameters, and a current type of service being utilized; monitoring the performance parameters over time for the multiple types of wireless devices experiencing a handover triggering event; storing the performance parameters for the multiple types of wireless devices… receiving network events from one or more access nodes; analyzing the network events and the stored performance parameters including the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices to formulate handover plans for the multiple types of wireless devices for at least one type of service being utilized; and”” ([para 0044]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the UE 422 to the serving cell 408, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, an existing 3GPP handover event (e.g., A2 or A4) is used to trigger the uplink-aware and control channel-aware skip handover.” ; [para 0026]: “The UE device 122 can be one type of any number of (e.g., URLLC) devices, including, but not limited to medical-related devices, vehicles, sensors, small measuring devices and so forth, which can be moving at relatively high speeds, e.g., on drones, mobile robots and so forth.” ; [para 0045]: “As shown in FIG. 4 via the arrow from the neighboring cell(s) 440 to the controller 402, and the arrow from the serving cell 408 to the controller 402, the controller 402 collects the PDCCH discontinuous transmission (DTX) data of the current cell to ensure that it is lower than a certain threshold (e.g., 1%) that secures the coverage needed to maintain the reliability KPI; (note that the uplink SINR data is also collected from the neighboring cells 440 and the serving cell 408). In addition to checking the DTX data, the CCE utilization is collected and checked to ensure that the serving cell has better control channel utilization to schedule the URLLC data which is needed to satisfy the delay requirements.”)
“generating the handover plans corresponding to the wireless device profiles for the multiple types of wireless devices utilizing a particular type of service.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “route information” nor “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices” ([para 0062]: “In some examples, the mobile terminal 10 provides information indicative of the mobile terminal's current location, direction or trajectory, and/or the like.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Curcio, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Curcio. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Curcio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Atawia in view of Curcio also does not disclose “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices”
However, Kumar discloses the missing feature “building multiple wireless device profiles, each wireless device profile corresponding to one of the multiple types of wireless devices” ([para 0038]: “In contrast to the previous 3GPP standards-based example, embodiments herein provide that management system 102 can be configured with different handover profiles in which each handover profile can be configured such that it is suited for a specific type of device and the application(s) operating on the type of a device, including QoS levels that may be involved for various application(s) operating on the different types of devices.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Kumar, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize device type-based profiles as disclosed by Kumar. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices type, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Kumar to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 17, Atawia discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “the operations further comprising selecting a handover plan and utilizing the handover plan to approve a handover based on a default threshold.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.” ; [para 0051]: “Thus, the UE can potentially skip handover if the Ultx is less than a predefined maximum threshold.”)
Regarding claim 18, Atawia discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “the operations further comprising selecting a handover plan and utilizing thehandover plan to override a handover based on a default threshold.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.” ; [para 0051]: “Thus, the UE can potentially skip handover if the Ultx is less than a predefined maximum threshold.”)
Regarding claim 19, Atawia discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “the operations further comprising selectin a handover plan and transmitting the handover plan to an access node serving the wireless device.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Regarding claim 20, Atawia discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “wherein the particular type of service is voice over new radio (VoNR)” ([para 0001]: “In order to meet such challenging requirements during mobility, an advanced new radio (e.g., fifth generation, or ‘5G’, and beyond) network typically triggers handovers to ensure that the URLLC device is connected to the best serving cell.” Wherein the examiner takes official notice that voice over 5G NR is well known in the art.)
Claim(s) 6-8 and 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atawia (US 20240107392 A1) in view of Curcio (US 20120009890 A1), Kumar (US 20220330112 A1), and further in view of Wu (US 20240340748 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “wherein each handover plan is a handover map illustrating optimal handover locations and the method further comprises formulating handover instructions based on the handover plan.”
However, Wu discloses the missing feature “wherein each handover plan is a handover map illustrating optimal handover locations and the method further comprises formulating handover instructions based on the handover plan.” ([para 0092]: “As shown by reference number 630, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary. For example, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary map that specifies one or more handover boundaries selected by a network node (e.g., a network-selected handover boundary) for performing a handover, and the first network node 602 may select the handover boundary from the handover boundary map based at least in part on any combination of an operating condition at the UE 604, navigation information associated with the UE 604, and/or a coverage quality metric associated with another network node.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Wu, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Wu. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Wu to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 7, Atawia in view of Curcio, Kumar, and Wu discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “further comprising forwarding the handover instructions to an access node.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Regarding claim 8, Atawia in view of Curcio, Kumar, and Wu discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “further comprising forwarding the handover instructions to an access node.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Regarding claim 10, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “each handover plan includes a handover map”
However, Wu discloses the missing feature “each handover plan includes a handover map”
([para 0092]: “As shown by reference number 630, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary. For example, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary map that specifies one or more handover boundaries selected by a network node (e.g., a network-selected handover boundary) for performing a handover, and the first network node 602 may select the handover boundary from the handover boundary map based at least in part on any combination of an operating condition at the UE 604, navigation information associated with the UE 604, and/or a coverage quality metric associated with another network node.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Wu, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize route information as disclosed by Wu. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Wu to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 11, Atawia in view of Curcio, Kumar, and Wu discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia does not explicitly disclose “handover map illustrates locations where default settings should be accepted and locations where the default settings should be overridden for each wireless device type”
However, Wu discloses the missing feature “handover map illustrates locations where default settings should be accepted and locations where the default settings should be overridden for each wireless device type” ([para 0092]: “As shown by reference number 630, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary. For example, the first network node 602 may obtain a handover boundary map that specifies one or more handover boundaries selected by a network node (e.g., a network-selected handover boundary) for performing a handover, and the first network node 602 may select the handover boundary from the handover boundary map based at least in part on any combination of an operating condition at the UE 604, navigation information associated with the UE 604, and/or a coverage quality metric associated with another network node.” Wherein the handover boundary selected in good operating conditions may be reasonably interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art as corresponding to the default setting.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Atawia and Wu, to modify the technique as disclosed by Atawia, to utilize a default setting as disclosed by Wu. The motivation for doing so is that it allows better optimization to the wireless devices intended route, thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Atawia with Wu to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 12, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar and Wu discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “further comprising overriding the handover and sending a message to the wireless device overriding the handover.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Regarding claim 13, Atawia in view of Curcio and Kumar discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Atawia further discloses “further comprising updating the handover plan based on performance parameters and the route information reports and forwarding the updated handover plan to an access node.” ([para 0047]: “If the above conditions are each satisfied, then the UE can skip handover (e.g., no handover command/a skip handover message is issued) at operation 514. Otherwise, handover is to the best neighbor (e.g., that satisfied A2 or A4), via the handover command to the serving cell, resulting in the serving cell providing the UE with radio resource control reconfiguration data.”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAAD KHAWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at (571)-270-7191. 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.
/SAAD KHAWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights