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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities: the numbering of the claim is not correct. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Martin et al (20230180019).
Regarding claim 1, Martin et al discloses, a method comprising (abstract, fig. 1-20):
receiving input indicating (receive user-interface) an alternative site in which to install a first wireless access point (after the proposed change location and/or the network), the alternative site being different than an original site (before the proposed change location and/or the network) selected for installation of the first wireless access point (¶ 0060, 0064, 0066, 0070, 0145, electronic device 110-1 may receive user-interface activity specifying a proposed change associated with a wireless-network component in the wireless network, such as a location and a type of the wireless-network component in environment 106; computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, a recommendation based at least in part on the feedback and/or the updated pretrained predictive model, where the recommendation includes a modification to the wireless network to improve a communication-performance metric of the wireless network. For example, the modification may include using a different type of access point and/or changing a location of an access point such as access point 116-1. Alternatively or additionally, augmented reality may be used to show the installer the change to the radio-frequency radiation as the position of an access point is changed. For example, the installer may touch an icon of an access point in a touch-sensitive display on the electronic device and may draft the displayed current access-point location to a potential new location.);
predicting a wireless coverage associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0064, 0145, In response, electronic device 110-1 may predict an impact of the proposed change. In some embodiments, the impact is predicted using a pretrained predictive model. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments predicting the impact includes providing, to computer system 130, the proposed change and optionally a model of environment 106 e.g., a model of a geometric layout and/or estimated parameters associated with radio-frequency properties of at least a portion of environment 106. After receiving the proposed change and optionally the model, computer system 130 may predict the impact. Then, computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, the predicted impact. Next, the electronic device may update the provided visual representation to reflect the predicted impact of the proposed change. Note that the updated visual representation may include numerical values associated with different locations in environment 106 and/or a graphical representation to indicate the predicted impact); and
based on the predicted wireless coverage, assigning a performance metric to the alternative site (¶ 0055, 0064-0066, 0118, the wireless network is predicted to achieve one or more target communication-performance metrics such as an RSSI, a throughput, etc.. For example, the wireless network may be predicted to be within a predefined range such as 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% or 50% of the one or more target communication-performance metrics. Note that the one or more target communication-performance metrics may be directly or indirectly specified by the user, such as based at least in part on a request for a ‘high density deployment with high performance.’ The designing may be performed by providing, to computer system 130, the model and the one or more target communication-performance metrics).
Regarding claims 2, 16, Martin et al discloses, further comprising: wirelessly transmitting the performance metric to an installation technician (installer) for review (¶ 0066, 0070, electronic device 110-1 may interactively provide the installation instructions to an installer while a given access point such as access point 116-1 in access points 116 is being installed in environment 106, where providing the instructions includes providing a digital representation of at least a portion of environment 106 proximate to a given location in the locations of access point 116-1. For example, the installation instructions may indicate the given location and may guide the installer through the installation of access point 116, and electronic device 110-1 may display the digital representation such as using augmented reality on a display in electronic device 110-1).
Regarding claims 3, 17, Martin et al discloses, wherein the input indicating the alternative site is generated by a respective installation technician surveying the original site (¶ 0066, 0070, electronic device 110-1 may interactively provide the installation instructions to an installer while a given access point such as access point 116-1 in access points 116 is being installed in environment 106, where providing the instructions includes providing a digital representation of at least a portion of environment 106 proximate to a given location in the locations of access point 116-1. For example, the installation instructions may indicate the given location and may guide the installer through the installation of access point 116, and electronic device 110-1 may display the digital representation such as using augmented reality on a display in electronic device 110-1).
Regarding claims 4, 18, Martin et al discloses, wherein the respective installation technician generates the input in response to detecting an impediment associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the original site (¶ 0006, 0066, 0070, the changes may include receiving user-interface instructions that indicate a change to the given location in the digital representation e.g., a user dragging and moving the given location in the digital representation).
Regarding claims 5, 19, Martin et al discloses, wherein the respective installation technician generates the input indicating the alternative site based upon an in-person survey by the respective installation technician in a geographical region including the original site (¶ 0059, 0064, 0066, 0070, electronic device 110-1 may receive user-interface activity specifying a proposed change associated with a wireless-network component in the wireless network, such as a location and a type of the wireless-network component in environment 106, computer system 130 may receive feedback, from electronic device 110-1, about performance of the pretrained predictive model, where the pretrained predictive model predicts one or more communication-performance metrics of a wireless network).
Regarding claims 6, 20, Martin et al discloses, in response to detecting that the performance metric is below a threshold level, rejecting installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site; and providing notification of the rejection to a respective installation technician (¶ 0139-0142, 0159, 0161, 164, based at least in part on one or more key-performance indicators or communication-performance metrics for a wireless network e.g., a number of connected users, a number of dropped connections because of dead spots, etc. . . . , the computer system may provide a suggestion or a recommendation such as an upgrade. Thus, the computer system may indicate: “We know you asked for good enough connectivity, but we see a lot of user connections dropping. For example, this characterization may include: the communication performance of an existing wireless network that is going to be removed or replace “We noticed that you have a network that generates lots of interference. Will this network be removed or replaced with the new network?” and “This network appears to be generating interference and is coming from the office/building next door.”).
Regarding claims 7, 21, Martin et al discloses, performing a preliminary analysis of the first wireless access point providing the predicted wireless coverage at the alternative site; and producing the performance metric based on the preliminary analysis (¶ 0086, 0119, 0162-0163, the analysis techniques are further illustrated in FIG. 7, which presents a drawing illustrating an example of communication among electronic device 110-1 and computer system 130. Notably, electronic device 110-1 may provide feedback 710 about performance of a pretrained predictive model, where the pretrained predictive model predicts one or more communication-performance metrics of a wireless network e.g., based at least in part on a model of a geometric layout and/or estimated parameters associated with radio-frequency properties of at least a portion of the environment of the wireless network, and feedback 710 is associated with an accuracy qualitatively or quantitatively of the predictions.).
Regarding claims 8, 22, Martin et al discloses, providing notification of the performance metric to an installation technician for review, the installation technician assigned to install the first wireless access point at the original site; and in response to providing notification, receiving a message indicating selection of the alternative site by the installation technician in which to install the first wireless access point (¶ 0139-0142, 0159, 0161, 164, based at least in part on one or more key-performance indicators or communication-performance metrics for a wireless network e.g., a number of connected users, a number of dropped connections because of dead spots, etc. . . . , the computer system may provide a suggestion or a recommendation such as an upgrade. Thus, the computer system may indicate: “We know you asked for good enough connectivity, but we see a lot of user connections dropping. For example, this characterization may include: the communication performance of an existing wireless network that is going to be removed or replace “We noticed that you have a network that generates lots of interference. Will this network be removed or replaced with the new network?” and “This network appears to be generating interference and is coming from the office/building next door.”).
Regarding claims 9, 23, Martin et al discloses, further comprising: in response to receiving the message indicating selection of the alternative site by the installation technician, performing a secondary analysis of installing the first wireless access point at the alternative site, the secondary analysis being more robust than the preliminary analysis; based on the secondary analysis, predicting a quality of wireless services associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site as indicated by the selection; and generating a decision approving installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site in response to detecting that the predicted quality of wireless services is above a threshold level (¶ 0139-0142, 0159, 0161, 164, based at least in part on one or more key-performance indicators or communication-performance metrics for a wireless network e.g., a number of connected users, a number of dropped connections because of dead spots, etc. . . . , the computer system may provide a suggestion or a recommendation such as an upgrade. Thus, the computer system may indicate: “We know you asked for good enough connectivity, but we see a lot of user connections dropping. For example, this characterization may include: the communication performance of an existing wireless network that is going to be removed or replace “We noticed that you have a network that generates lots of interference. Will this network be removed or replaced with the new network?” and “This network appears to be generating interference and is coming from the office/building next door.”).
Regarding claims 10, 24, Martin et al discloses, further comprising: communicating the decision in a message over a wireless communication link to the installation technician, the decision in the message prompting the installation technician to install the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0139-0148, 0159, 0161, 164, based at least in part on one or more key-performance indicators or communication-performance metrics for a wireless network e.g., a number of connected users, a number of dropped connections because of dead spots, etc. . . . , the computer system may provide a suggestion or a recommendation such as an upgrade. Thus, the computer system may indicate: “We know you asked for good enough connectivity, but we see a lot of user connections dropping. For example, this characterization may include: the communication performance of an existing wireless network that is going to be removed or replace “We noticed that you have a network that generates lots of interference. Will this network be removed or replaced with the new network?” and “This network appears to be generating interference and is coming from the office/building next door.” The initialization testing may include: validation of basic two-way communications between the cloud and the access point (or device under test or DUT); and/or validation of successful completion of an internal self-test of the access point or DUT. Moreover, configuration and licensing testing may include: confirmation of specific configuration parameters or a profile written to the access point or DUT, including an access-point firmware upgrade (as needed); and/or confirmation that valid product licensing conditions are satisfied (such as the ‘access point was successfully assigned an available license’).
Regarding claims 11, 25, Martin et al discloses, wherein the alternative site is a first alternative site; and wherein the wireless coverage is a first wireless coverage; wherein the performance metric is a first performance metric; and wherein the input further indicates a second alternative site in which to install the first wireless access point, the second alternative site being different than the original site selected for installation of the first wireless access point (¶ 0056, 0061, 0099, based at least in part on radio-frequency project plan 1112, processor 1110 may interactively provide installation instructions to an installer while access point 116-1 in the access points is being installed in the environment. For example, processor 1110 may provide instruction 1120 to display 1122 in electronic device for a digital representation (DR) 1124 of at least a portion of the environment proximate to a given location in the locations of access point 116-1. As the installation process progresses (e.g., when the installer is ready to install a subsequent second access point in the access points), processor 1110 may dynamically update the digital representation to indicate a second location in the locations of the second access point).
Regarding claims 12, 26, Martin et al discloses, predicting second wireless coverage associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the second alternative site; and based on the predicted second wireless coverage, assigning a second performance metric to the installation of the first wireless access point at the second alternative site (¶ 0056, 0061, 0099, based at least in part on radio-frequency project plan 1112, processor 1110 may interactively provide installation instructions to an installer while access point 116-1 in the access points is being installed in the environment. For example, processor 1110 may provide instruction 1120 to display 1122 in electronic device for a digital representation (DR) 1124 of at least a portion of the environment proximate to a given location in the locations of access point 116-1. As the installation process progresses (e.g., when the installer is ready to install a subsequent second access point in the access points), processor 1110 may dynamically update the digital representation to indicate a second location in the locations of the second access point).
Regarding claims 13, 27, Martin et al discloses, wirelessly communicating the first performance metric and the second performance metric to a technician assigned to installation of the first wireless access point (¶ 0056, 0061, 0099, based at least in part on radio-frequency project plan 1112, processor 1110 may interactively provide installation instructions to an installer while access point 116-1 in the access points is being installed in the environment. For example, processor 1110 may provide instruction 1120 to display 1122 in electronic device for a digital representation (DR) 1124 of at least a portion of the environment proximate to a given location in the locations of access point 116-1. As the installation process progresses (e.g., when the installer is ready to install a subsequent second access point in the access points), processor 1110 may dynamically update the digital representation to indicate a second location in the locations of the second access point).
Regarding claims 14, 28, Martin et al discloses, wherein the first performance metric indicates a first ranking of installing the first wireless access point at the first alternative site; wherein the second performance metric indicates a second ranking installing the first wireless access point at the second alternative site; and wherein the second ranking is higher than the first ranking (¶ 0099, 0148, testing voice of Internet protocol (VoIP), a video mean opinion score (MOS) or quality-of-experience score, and/or virtual reality or augmented reality readiness e.g., a user may be instructed to move around a room with a virtual reality headset or to ensure that a user-interface quality is sufficient to ensure that the user does not get motion sickness).
Regarding claim 15, Martin et al discloses, a system comprising:
communication management hardware operative to (¶ 0011, 0175):
receive input indicating an alternative site in which to install a first wireless access point, the alternative site being different than an original site selected for installation of the first wireless access point (¶ 0060, 0064, 0066, 0070, 0145, electronic device 110-1 may receive user-interface activity specifying a proposed change associated with a wireless-network component in the wireless network, such as a location and a type of the wireless-network component in environment 106; computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, a recommendation based at least in part on the feedback and/or the updated pretrained predictive model, where the recommendation includes a modification to the wireless network to improve a communication-performance metric of the wireless network. For example, the modification may include using a different type of access point and/or changing a location of an access point such as access point 116-1. Alternatively or additionally, augmented reality may be used to show the installer the change to the radio-frequency radiation as the position of an access point is changed. For example, the installer may touch an icon of an access point in a touch-sensitive display on the electronic device and may draft the displayed current access-point location to a potential new location.);
predict a wireless coverage associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0064, 0145, In response, electronic device 110-1 may predict an impact of the proposed change. In some embodiments, the impact is predicted using a pretrained predictive model. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments predicting the impact includes providing, to computer system 130, the proposed change and optionally a model of environment 106 e.g., a model of a geometric layout and/or estimated parameters associated with radio-frequency properties of at least a portion of environment 106. After receiving the proposed change and optionally the model, computer system 130 may predict the impact. Then, computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, the predicted impact. Next, the electronic device may update the provided visual representation to reflect the predicted impact of the proposed change. Note that the updated visual representation may include numerical values associated with different locations in environment 106 and/or a graphical representation to indicate the predicted impact); and
based on the predicted wireless coverage, assign a performance metric to the alternative site (¶ 0055, 0064-0066, 0118, the wireless network is predicted to achieve one or more target communication-performance metrics such as an RSSI, a throughput, etc.. For example, the wireless network may be predicted to be within a predefined range such as 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% or 50% of the one or more target communication-performance metrics. Note that the one or more target communication-performance metrics may be directly or indirectly specified by the user, such as based at least in part on a request for a ‘high density deployment with high performance.’ The designing may be performed by providing, to computer system 130, the model and the one or more target communication-performance metrics).
Regarding claim 29, Martin et al discloses, Computer-readable storage hardware having instructions stored thereon, the instructions, when carried out by computer processor hardware (¶ 0011, 0175, a computer-readable storage medium with program instructions for use with the electronic device or the computer system. When executed by the electronic device or the computer system, the program instructions cause the electronic device or the computer system to perform), cause the computer processor hardware to:
receive input indicating an alternative site in which to install a first wireless access point, the alternative site being different than an original site selected for installation of the first wireless access point (¶ 0060, 0064, 0066, 0070, 0145, electronic device 110-1 may receive user-interface activity specifying a proposed change associated with a wireless-network component in the wireless network, such as a location and a type of the wireless-network component in environment 106; computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, a recommendation based at least in part on the feedback and/or the updated pretrained predictive model, where the recommendation includes a modification to the wireless network to improve a communication-performance metric of the wireless network. For example, the modification may include using a different type of access point and/or changing a location of an access point such as access point 116-1. Alternatively or additionally, augmented reality may be used to show the installer the change to the radio-frequency radiation as the position of an access point is changed. For example, the installer may touch an icon of an access point in a touch-sensitive display on the electronic device and may draft the displayed current access-point location to a potential new location.);
predict a wireless coverage associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0064, 0145, In response, electronic device 110-1 may predict an impact of the proposed change. In some embodiments, the impact is predicted using a pretrained predictive model. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments predicting the impact includes providing, to computer system 130, the proposed change and optionally a model of environment 106 e.g., a model of a geometric layout and/or estimated parameters associated with radio-frequency properties of at least a portion of environment 106. After receiving the proposed change and optionally the model, computer system 130 may predict the impact. Then, computer system 130 may provide, to electronic device 110-1, the predicted impact. Next, the electronic device may update the provided visual representation to reflect the predicted impact of the proposed change. Note that the updated visual representation may include numerical values associated with different locations in environment 106 and/or a graphical representation to indicate the predicted impact); and
based on the predicted wireless coverage, assign a performance metric to the installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0055, 0064-0066, 0118, the wireless network is predicted to achieve one or more target communication-performance metrics such as an RSSI, a throughput, etc.. For example, the wireless network may be predicted to be within a predefined range such as 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% or 50% of the one or more target communication-performance metrics. Note that the one or more target communication-performance metrics may be directly or indirectly specified by the user, such as based at least in part on a request for a ‘high density deployment with high performance.’ The designing may be performed by providing, to computer system 130, the model and the one or more target communication-performance metrics).
Regarding claim 30, Martin et al discloses, further comprising: based on installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site, storing configuration information indicating modifications to an original installation plan proposing installation of the first wireless access point at the original site, the configuration information indicating attributes associated with installation of the first wireless access point at the alternative site (¶ 0057, 0146, 0150, the design information may displayed or printed out by electronic device 110-1, stored in memory associated with electronic device 110-1, or provided to another computer).
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.
Claim(s) 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al (20230180019) in view of GINIS et al (20240406749).
Regarding claim 32, Martin et al discloses, electronic device 110-1 may create a model that represents environment 106, where the model specifies a 2D a 3D geometric layout of environment 106 and/or estimated parameters associated with radio-frequency properties of at least a portion of environment 106 (such as a portion of a building, e.g., a floor, a wall, a ceiling, etc.). Note that in some embodiments the model may characterize a communication performance of an existing wireless network in or proximate to the environment (¶ 0050).
Martin et al does not specifically disclose where the first wireless access point is mounted over one of: a building rooftop.
In the same field of endeavor, GINIS et al discloses, where the first wireless access point is mounted over one of: a building rooftop (¶ 0013, 0097, 0293, a new base-station may alternately be installed on the rooftop of a building). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claim invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of Martin et al by specifically adding feature in order to enhance system performance to improving signaling overhead and the angle formed between the line from the client radio to the base-station serving and the line from the client radio to a base-station of a neighboring cell is larger than the antenna beam-width, thus, preventing self-interference as taught by GINIS et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHAWAR IQBAL whose telephone number is (571)272-7909. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Jinsong Hu can be reached at 5712723965. 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.
/KHAWAR IQBAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643