DETAILED ACTION
Applicant's submission filed on 19 February 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 23, 24, 28, and 30 are currently amended; no claims are cancelled; claims 2-22, 25-27, 29, and 31 are previously presented; no claims have been added. Claims 1-31 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 19 February 2026, with respect to “Objections to the Specification” have been fully considered and the examiner notes the applicant has made the appropriate corrections to overcome the objection.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 19 February 2026, with respect to “Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 112” have been fully considered and the examiner notes the applicant has made the appropriate corrections to overcome the rejection.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9, 10, 20, 28, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong et al. (US 2023/0412224 A1), hereafter referred Kong, in view of Sandberg et al. (US 2019/0097750 A1), hereafter referred Sandberg and in further view of Egner et al. (US 2018/0184330 A1), hereafter referred Egner.
Regarding claim 1, Kong teaches a method of determining wireless service quality in a shared environment, the method comprising:
a) receiving a wireless transmission from a client device in the shared environment (Kong, [0002]-[0004]; the access network node requires information from the wireless device regarding properties of the downlink channel, commonly referred to as Channel State Information (CSI), where the wireless device reports the CSI in a CSI report to the access network node);
b) processing the received wireless transmission to determine a client modulation-and-coding scheme and a client device attribute associated with the client device (Kong, [0002]-[0004]; the access network node determines the used transport format, transport block size, modulation and coding scheme (MCS), MIMO transmission mode, etc. for the downlink and uplink using the information in the CSI report).
Kong does not expressly teach c) calculating a rank of the client device using the client sample wherein the rank is based on a universal index that is related to the determined client modulation-and-coding scheme and to the determined client device attribute; and
d) inferring a wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank.
However, Sandberg teaches c) calculating a rank of the client device using the client sample wherein the rank is based on a universal index that is related to the determined client modulation-and-coding scheme and to the determined client device attribute (Sandberg, Fig. 2 and Fig. 7, [0025]-[0027] and [0068]-[0074]; the transmission node determines an estimation error of the estimated quality of the radio link which is based on the estimated Signal-to-Interference-and-Noise-Ratio (SINR) of the radio link estimates quality related parameters of the radio link over which the radio signal was transmitted, such as SINR, where the SINR is used when selecting a MCS that should be used); and
d) inferring a wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank (Sandberg, [0060]-[0061]; the channel may be considered unpredictable if the estimation error of a quality of the radio link exceeds a predetermined threshold).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Kong in view of Sandberg does not expressly teach a plurality of client devices, where each of the plurality of client devices has a determined client modulation-and-coding scheme, a determined client device attribute, a calculated rank, and an inferred wireless service quality; and aggregating the inferred wireless service quality of each of the plurality of client devices to determine a wireless quality score of the shared environment.
However, Egner teaches a plurality of client devices, where each of the plurality of client devices has a determined client modulation-and-coding scheme, a determined client device attribute, a calculated rank, and an inferred wireless service quality; and aggregating the inferred wireless service quality of each of the plurality of client devices to determine a wireless quality score of the shared environment (Egner, [0122]-[0125]; a context aware radio resource management system including a concurrent wireless link optimization system determine link ratings for local Quality of Service for an end-to-end rating for wireless communication paths involving a device A and device B, where the optimization system estimates an end-to-end link quality score for each wireless connection path between device A and device B as an aggregation of end-to-end quality scores involving the devices is performed).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg to include the above recited limitations as taught by Egner in order to optimize communication channel selection (Egner, [0060]).
Regarding claim 28, Kong teaches a system that determines wireless service quality in a shared environment, the system comprising:
a) a device configured to receive a wireless transmission from a client device in the shared environment (Kong, [0002]-[0004]; the access network node requires information from the wireless device regarding properties of the downlink channel, commonly referred to as Channel State Information (CSI), where the wireless device reports the CSI in a CSI report to the access network node);
b) a processor in communication with the device and a controller in communication with the processor (Kong, Fig. 8, [0100]; processing circuitry is provided using one or more of a CPU, multiprocessor, microcontroller, DSP, etc.), the processor configured to:
i) process the received wireless transmission to determine a client modulation-and-coding scheme and a client device attribute associated with the client device (Kong, [0002]-[0004]; the access network node determines the used transport format, transport block size, modulation and coding scheme (MCS), MIMO transmission mode, etc. for the downlink and uplink using the information in the CSI report).
Kong does not expressly teach ii) calculate a rank of the client device using the client sample wherein the rank is based on a universal index that is related to the client modulation- and-coding scheme and to the client device attribute; and
iii) infer a wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank of the client device; and
c) the controller configured to receive the inferred wireless service quality and to determine at least one wireless test based on the inferred wireless service quality.
However, Sandberg teaches ii) calculate a rank of the client device using the client sample wherein the rank is based on a universal index that is related to the client modulation- and-coding scheme and to the client device attribute (Sandberg, Fig. 2 and Fig. 7, [0025]-[0027] and [0068]-[0074]; the transmission node determines an estimation error of the estimated quality of the radio link which is based on the estimated Signal-to-Interference-and-Noise-Ratio (SINR) of the radio link estimates quality related parameters of the radio link over which the radio signal was transmitted, such as SINR, where the SINR is used when selecting a MCS that should be used); and
iii) infer a wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank of the client device (Sandberg, [0060]-[0061]; the channel may be considered unpredictable if the estimation error of a quality of the radio link exceeds a predetermined threshold); and
c) the controller configured to receive the inferred wireless service quality and to determine at least one wireless test based on the inferred wireless service quality (Sandberg, [0053]-[0057]; when the radio channel is found to be unpredictable, an offset may be added to the MCS decision input value, where additional information may be acquired to determine the decision input value such as on/off information on potential interferers which checks to see whether a set of active interferers has changed compared to a TTI in which the current CQI report was measured).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Kong in view of Sandberg does not expressly teach a plurality of client devices, where each of the plurality of client devices has a determined client modulation-and-coding scheme, a determined client device attribute, a calculated rank, and an inferred wireless service quality; and aggregating the inferred wireless service quality of each of the plurality of client devices to determine a wireless quality score of the shared environment.
However, Egner teaches a plurality of client devices, where each of the plurality of client devices has a determined client modulation-and-coding scheme, a determined client device attribute, a calculated rank, and an inferred wireless service quality; and aggregating the inferred wireless service quality of each of the plurality of client devices to determine a wireless quality score of the shared environment (Egner, [0122]-[0125]; a context aware radio resource management system including a concurrent wireless link optimization system determine link ratings for local Quality of Service for an end-to-end rating for wireless communication paths involving a device A and device B, where the optimization system estimates an end-to-end link quality score for each wireless connection path between device A and device B as an aggregation of end-to-end quality scores involving the devices is performed).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg to include the above recited limitations as taught by Egner in order to optimize communication channel selection (Egner, [0060]).
Regarding claims 2 and 29, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 and the system that determines wireless service quality of claim 28 above. Kong does not expressly teach further comprising identifying a network problem based on the inferred wireless service quality.
However, Sandberg teaches further comprising identifying a network problem based on the inferred wireless service quality (Sandberg, [0053]-[0057]; when the radio channel is found to be unpredictable, an offset may be added to the MCS decision input value, where additional information may be acquired to determine the decision input value such as on/off information on potential interferers which checks to see whether a set of active interferers has changed compared to a TTI in which the current CQI report was measured).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Regarding claim 3, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 2 above. Kong does not expressly teach wherein the identified network problem comprises at least one of a roaming problem, a coverage problem, a communication congestion problem, a rogue device problem, a connectivity problem, or a wireless interference problem.
However, Sandberg teaches wherein the identified network problem comprises at least one of a roaming problem, a coverage problem, a communication congestion problem, a rogue device problem, a connectivity problem, or a wireless interference problem (Sandberg, [0053]-[0057]; when the radio channel is found to be unpredictable, an offset may be added to the MCS decision input value, where additional information may be acquired to determine the decision input value such as on/off information on potential interferers which checks to see whether a set of active interferers has changed compared to a TTI in which the current CQI report was measured).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Regarding claim 7, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Further, Kong teaches wherein receiving the wireless transmission from a client device in the shared environment comprises receiving using an external monitor (Kong, Fig. 8, [0100]; the access network node has a processor and memory that contains a computer program that performs the set of operations where it is inherent that a processor and memory is known to be a computer device and a computer device can have a display monitor).
Regarding claim 9, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a PSK modulation scheme.
However, Sandberg teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a PSK modulation scheme (Sandberg, Fig. 3-4, MCS table illustrates using QPSK modulation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Regarding claim 10, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a QAM modulation scheme.
However, Sandberg teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a QAM modulation scheme (Sandberg, Fig. 3-4, MCS table illustrates using 16 QAM modulation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong to include the above recited limitations as taught by Sandberg in order to improve the link adaptation mechanism (Sandberg, [0008]).
Regarding claim 20, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Further, Kong teaches wherein the shared environment comprises one of a shared location, a shared access point, a shared management system domain, a shared communications channel or a shared RF spectrum (Kong, [0055]; the wireless device is connected to the access network node and can communicate by sending request in a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) message).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Athley et al. (US 2021/0360649 A1), hereafter referred Athley.
Regarding claim 4, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach further comprising performing step a) through step c) for a second client device in the shared environment, thereby calculating a rank of the second device.
However, Athley teaches further comprising performing step a) through step c) for a second client device in the shared environment, thereby calculating a rank of the second device (Athley, [0050]; the TRP determines suitable TRP beams for the two UEs based on estimated highest average SINR over both UEs for the different TRP beam combinations where every UE that has stronger interference compared to received signal strength is removed from the calculation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Athley in order to improve the network performance when co-scheduling UEs for MU-MIMO transmissions (Athley, [0022]).
Regarding claim 5, Kong in view of Sandberg in view of Egner further in view of Athley teaches the method of claim 4 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein inferring the wireless service quality of the shared environment comprises inferring the wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank of the client device and the calculated rank of the second client device.
However, Athley teaches wherein inferring the wireless service quality of the shared environment comprises inferring the wireless service quality of the shared environment based on the calculated rank of the client device and the calculated rank of the second client device (Athley, [0050]; the TRP determines suitable TRP beams for the two UEs based on estimated highest average SINR over both UEs for the different TRP beam combinations where every UE that has stronger interference compared to received signal strength is removed from the calculation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Athley in order to improve the network performance when co-scheduling UEs for MU-MIMO transmissions (Athley, [0022]).
Regarding claim 6, Kong in view of Sandberg in view of Egner further in view of Athley teaches the method of claim 5 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client device and the second client device share a wireless access point.
However, Athley teaches wherein the client device and the second client device share a wireless access point (Athley, [0050]; the TRP determines suitable TRP beams for the two UEs based on estimated highest average SINR over both UEs for the different TRP beam combinations where every UE that has stronger interference compared to received signal strength is removed from the calculation).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Athley in order to improve the network performance when co-scheduling UEs for MU-MIMO transmissions (Athley, [0022]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 104378780 A. A machine translation of CN 104378780 A has been provided and is hereafter referred Zhu.
Regarding claim 8, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein processing the received wireless transmission to determine the client modulation-and-coding scheme and the client device attribute associated with the client device comprises processing using statistical sampling.
However, Zhu teaches wherein processing the received wireless transmission to determine the client modulation-and-coding scheme and the client device attribute associated with the client device comprises processing using statistical sampling (Zhu, Fig. 1, [0102]-[0111]; each order of MCS corresponding to SINR interval is divided into multiple SINR sub interval based on statistical sample window to define the SINR sub intervals).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Zhu in order to achieve self-adaptively selecting needing demodulation threshold of the MCS (Zhu, [0003]).
Claims 11-16 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claims 1 and 28 above, and further in view of Xin et al. (US 2021/0218492 A1), hereafter referred Xin.
Regarding claim 11, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 1/2 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 1/2 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Regarding claim 12, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 5/6 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 5/6 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Regarding claim 13, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 3/4 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 3/4 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Regarding claim 14, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 2/3 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 2/3 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Regarding claims 15 and 31, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 and the system that determines wireless service quality of claim 28 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 1/2, a rate 5/6, a rate 34, and a rate 2/3 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises a rate 1/2, a rate 5/6, a rate 34, and a rate 2/3 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Regarding claim 16, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises at least one of a rate 1/2, a rate 5/6, a rate 3/4 or a rate 2/3 code.
However, Xin teaches wherein the client modulation-and-coding scheme comprises at least one of a rate 1/2, a rate 5/6, a rate 3/4 or a rate 2/3 code (Xin, [0051]; the coding rate (e.g. ½, 2/3, ¾, 5/6) that is applied at each encoder is determined by the MCS selected for the corresponding resource units).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Xin in order to utilize the forward error correction code in the MCS as specified in the IEEE 802.11ax standard (Xin, [0006]).
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kumar et al. (US 2019/0163912 A1), hereafter referred Kumar.
Regarding claim 17, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client device attribute comprises an operating system of the client device.
However, Kumar teaches wherein the client device attribute comprises an operating system of the client device (Kumar, [0114]-[0115]; the update client on the gateway device may discover dynamic device attributes that may comprise platform properties e.g. processor architecture, operating system type and version, etc.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Kumar in order to improve cybersecurity of devices on a network (Kumar, [0003]).
Regarding claim 18, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client device attribute comprises a platform of the client device.
However, Kumar teaches wherein the client device attribute comprises a platform of the client device (Kumar, [0114]-[0115]; the update client on the gateway device may discover dynamic device attributes that may comprise platform properties e.g. processor architecture, operating system type and version, etc.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Kumar in order to improve cybersecurity of devices on a network (Kumar, [0003]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Emmanuel et al. (US 2019/0260496 A1), hereafter referred Emmanuel.
Regarding claim 19, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the client device attribute comprises a data-rate shifting of the client device.
However, Emmanuel teaches wherein the client device attribute comprises a data-rate shifting of the client device (Emmanuel, [0052]-[0054]; data sets are arranged by data rate where by shifting to different columns toward the right would result in slower primary data rates).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Emmanuel in order to utilize primary data rates with less attempts (Emmanuel, [0054]).
Claims 21-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner as applied to claims 1 and 28 above, and further in view of Popovski et al. (US 2012/0243509 A1), hereafter referred Popovski.
Regarding claim 21, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a cellular transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a cellular transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Popovski in order to provide for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 22, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a WiFi transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a WiFi transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught by Popovski in order to provide for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 23, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a Zigbee transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a Zigbee transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught provide for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 24, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a Bluetooth transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a Bluetooth transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught provide for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 25, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a point-to-point transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a point-to-point transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught bovine for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 26, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises a radio-frequency-based transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises a radio-frequency-based transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught bovine for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 27, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the method of claim 1 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the wireless transmission comprises an optical transmission.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the wireless transmission comprises an optical transmission (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught bovine for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Regarding claim 30, Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner teaches the system that determines wireless service quality of claim 28 above. Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner does not expressly teach wherein the device comprises at least one of a WiFi device, an Ethernet device, a Zigbee device, a Bluetooth device, an RF communication device, or an optical communication device.
However, Popovski teaches wherein the device comprises at least one of a WiFi device, an Ethernet device, a Zigbee device, a Bluetooth device, an RF communication device, or an optical communication device (Popovski, [0092]; communication systems can include a photonic or optical network, a cellular system, a wireless local area network (e.g. Wifi), a wireless personal area network (e.g. Bluetooth, Infrared, Zigbee), point-to-point network, and a sensor network (e.g. RFID system and near-field communication network)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to create the invention of Kong in view of Sandberg further in view of Egner to include the above recited limitations as taught bovine for all relevant known communication systems to the present invention (Popovski, [0092]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
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 RODRICK MAK whose telephone number is (571)270-0284. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights