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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges Applicant's amendment filed on January 30, 2026. Claims 1, 4-6, 9-11, 14-16, 19 and 20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed January 30, 2026 concerning claims 1-20 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. The reasons set forth below.
Regarding claim 1, on page 9 of Applicant's remarks, Applicant submits that Gunasekara fails to explicitly or inherently disclose the recited claim language.
In response to applicant’s remarks, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Gunasekara teaches monitoring a wireless network to identify inoperative or degraded devices and restore network connectivity to end users. Gunasekara teaches in Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] detection and tracking of defective or inoperative network devices. By enhancing the capabilities for data collection, monitoring, and communication, identification of a variety of problems such as CM failure, AP failure, connection failure, continuous reboot, loss of network/IP address and user authentication/login failures is readily performed. When the device is identified, the AP may send a reboot or similar instruction that causes the device to reboot or take corrective action. Therefore, Gunasekara teaches wherein the network issue information comprises at least one of a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name and Examiner’s assertions are clear and proper.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gunasekara et al. (US 2017/0366983 A1).
1. Regarding claim 1, Gunasekara teaches a network issue troubleshooting method, comprising:
determining, by a first device, first information, wherein the first information comprises network issue information, and the network issue information indicates is usable to indicate a network issue to be troubleshot by a second device (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] AP/first device sends a reboot signal or similar instruction to the device to reboot or take other corrective action); and
wherein the network issue information comprises at least one of a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] facilitate detection and tracking of defective or inoperative network devices);
sending, by the first device, the first information to the second device (Paragraph [0082] AP sends a reboot signal or similar instruction to the device to reboot or take other corrective action).
2. Regarding claim 6, Gunasekara teaches a network issue troubleshooting method, comprising:
receiving, by a second device, first information sent by from a first device, wherein the first information comprises network issue information, and the network issue information indicates is usable to indicate a network issue to be troubleshot, wherein the network issue information comprises at least one of a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] facilitate detection and tracking of defective or inoperative network devices); and
troubleshooting, by the second device based on the first information, the network issue to be troubleshot (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] to [0083] enhancing capabilities for data collection, monitoring and communication between entities; identification of a variety of problems/network issues; corrective action).
3. Regarding claim 11, Gunasekara teaches an apparatus (Figures 1 and 9), comprising:
at least one processor; and
a memory coupled to the at least one processor and having program instructions stored thereon which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
determine first information, wherein the first information comprises network issue information, and the network issue information indicates is usable to indicate a network issue to be troubleshot by a second device (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] AP/first device sends a reboot signal or similar instruction to the device to reboot or take other corrective action) wherein the network issue information comprises at least one of a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] facilitate detection and tracking of defective or inoperative network devices); and
send, the first information to the second device (Paragraph [0082] AP sends a reboot signal or similar instruction to the device to reboot or take other corrective action).
4. Regarding claim 16, Gunasekara teaches an apparatus (Figures 1 and 9) An apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor; and
a memory coupled to the at least one processor and having program instructions stored thereon which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
receive first information sent by from a first device, wherein the first information comprises network issue information, and the network issue information indicates is usable to indicate a network issue to be troubleshot, wherein the network issue information comprises at least one of a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] facilitate detection and tracking of defective or inoperative network devices); and
troubleshoot, based on the first information, the network issue to be troubleshot (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] to [0083] enhancing capabilities for data collection, monitoring and communication between entities; identification of a variety of problems/network issues; corrective action).
5. Regarding claims 2, 7, 12 and 17, Gunasekara teaches, wherein the first information further comprises at least one of the following information:
diagnosis indication information, usable to indicate a diagnosis of the network issue to be troubleshot;
recovery indication information, usable to indicate recovery of the network issue to be troubleshot; or
query indication information, usable to indicate a query of the network issue to be troubleshot (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] AP sends a reboot signal or similar instruction to the device to reboot or take other corrective action; indicates a diagnosis since trying to bring device at issue back online).
6. Regarding claims 3, 8, 13 and 18, Gunasekara teaches, wherein the first information further comprises at least one of the following information:
a first duration, usable to indicate that another rectification is not allowed within the first duration in response to the network issue to be troubleshot being rectified; or
a second duration, usable to indicate to verify, within the second duration, whether the network issue to be troubleshot is successfully rectified (Paragraphs [0082] and [0083] AP checks whether the action has brought the device at issue back online).
7. Regarding claims 4, 9, 14, and 19, Gunasekara teaches, wherein the network issue information comprises more than one of the following: a network issue identifier, a network issue scope, a network issue type, or a network issue name (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] enhancing capabilities for data collection, monitoring and communication between entities; identification of a variety of problems/network issues).
8. Regarding claims 5, 10, 15, and 20, Gunasekara teaches, wherein the network issue scope comprises at least one of the following:
a network element, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue of the network element is a network issue to be troubleshot;
a cell, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue of the cell is a network issue to be troubleshot;
a geographic region, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue of the geographic region is a network issue to be troubleshot;
a tracking region, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue of the tracking region is a network issue to be troubleshot;
a network issue type, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue whose type is the network issue type is a network issue to be troubleshot; or
a network issue name, indicating usable to indicate that a network issue whose name is the network issue name is a network issue to be troubleshot (Paragraphs [0078] and [0082] enhancing capabilities for data collection, monitoring and communication between entities; identification of a variety of problems/network issues).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIANE LEE LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at (571)272-7969. 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.
/DIANE L LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights