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 .
Response to Amendment
The applicant’s amendments filed 2/4/2026 have overcome the rejections based on 35 USC section 112(a) presented in the last office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 7-9, 14-16, and 20-23 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The Examiner has used Rane to map the invention in a different manner than used before. The applicant’s argument that Rane prioritizes fully automated solutions is not persuasive because Rane still teaches that the exact same kind of notifications can be provided in response to analyzing signal strength.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7-9, 14-16, and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Number 11,140,738 to Rane in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2017/0245190 by Katar et al.
As to claim 1, Rane teaches a network resource (remote system 110) for monitoring one or more telemetry metrics associated with a network device in a network, the network resource comprising:
a memory storing one or more computer-readable instructions (ref. no. 222 in Figure 2); and a processor (ref. no. 220 in Figure 2) configured to execute the one or more computer-readable instructions stored on the memory to cause the network resource to:
communicate with an access point device (ref. no. 120) in the network (ref. no. 112) so as to receive the one or more telemetry metrics associated with the network device (col. 32, lines 45-49, the remote system 110 receives data regarding first device 106 from second device 108 via access point 120);
monitor the one or more telemetry metrics associated with the network device (col. 32, lines 45-49 and col. 6, lines 5-10), wherein the network resource is remote from the network such that the network resource connects to the network via a service provider in communication with the access point device (col. 14, lines 26-40) and wherein the one or more telemetry metrics indicate an installation issue (col. 31, lines 17-34); determine that the one or more telemetry metrics indicate an installation issue related to a location of the network device by comparing compare the one or more telemetry metrics to a threshold associated with the installation issue indicated by the one or more telemetry metrics (the telemetry metrics described in col. 32, lines 45-46 relate to the installation issue described in col. 31, lines 17-33, Also, col. 18, lines 56-60 state that process 300 may be performed by network analyzer component 122 but does not limit where process 300 is performed. Col 11, lines 23-43 shows how the remote system 110 could implement process 300 in order to implement its recommendations); and send one or more configuration notifications based on the comparison and the installation issue (col. 32, lines 52-55 and col. 21, lines 38-58, remote system provides recommendations for resolving the connection) to a user associated with a client device (col. 32, lines 61-col. 33, line 3, the master device receives the recommendation) and , wherein the client device is in communication with the network resource via the access point device (col. 4, lines 53-65, a second device 108 could be “master device” which is mapped to claimed client device and would therefore connect with remote system 110 via AP 120), wherein: the one or more telemetry metrics comprise one or more received signal strength indicators (RSSIs) associated with the installation issue (col. 21, lines 38-58); however Rane does not explicitly teach comparing the one or more telemetry metrics to the threshold comprises averaging the one or more RSSIs associated with the installation issue and comparing the averaged RSSIs to the threshold.
Katar teaches a method of comparing one or more telemetry metrics to a threshold comprises averaging one or more RSSIs associated with an installation issue and comparing the averaged RSSIs to the threshold (paragraph 90).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the network management art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Rane regarding using RSSI to determine installations issues with the teachings of Katar regarding averaging RSSI values over time in order to make a comparison to the threshold because taking values over time can avoid aberrant single values. The Examiner notes that the applicant does not disclose anything meaningful about averaging in paragraph 65.
As to claim 2, see ref. no. 724 of Figure 7 and col. 32, lines 45-49.
As to claims 7 and 21, see ref. no. 330 of Rane. In paragraph 66 of the specification, the applicant states that the action of re-installing a device is an example of changing location so the recommendation to move the device in Rane reads on the claimed recommendation to re-install the device as the term is disclosed by the applicant.
As to claims 8, 9, 14, and 22, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 1, 2, 7, and 21.
As to claims 15, 16, 20, and 23, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 1, 2, 7, and 21.
Conclusion
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 DOUGLAS B BLAIR whose telephone number is (571)272-3893. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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.
/DOUGLAS B BLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights