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
Claims 1, 10, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: “P2P” should change to “peer-to-peer (P2P)” in independent claims 1, 10, and 19 when the term is used for the first time. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 9-13, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2023/0232472 A1, hereinafter “Xu”) in view of Nakagawa (US 2008/0303956 A1, hereinafter “Nakagawa”).
Regarding independent claim 1:
Xu discloses a device (e.g., 350 in Fig. 3), the device comprising processing circuitry (e.g., 359 in Fig. 3) coupled to storage (e.g., 360 in Fig. 3), the processing circuitry configured to: identify an Enabling Parameter signal received from an Access Point (AP) (e.g., CLI measurement signal in Fig. 6A, [0100]); determine if the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses a first threshold; and activate a P2Pcommunication with a second device when the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses the first threshold (e.g., sidelink connection establishment in Fig. 6A, [0100], determines a measurement metric of the received CLI measurement signal, [0101], establish a sidelink connection with the second UE 604B when the determined measurement metric is greater than a value).
Xu is silent regarding the processing circuitry configured to deactivate the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value.
Nakagawa teaches deactivating a communication if a Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than a first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value (e.g., [0055], [0059], a second RSSI threshold for stopping data transmission, RSSI threshold value Th2 in Fig. 4, S306 and S307 in Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature the processing circuitry is configured to deactivate the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value, in order to reduce undesirable frequent connection interruptions.
Regarding claim 2:
Xu further discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the Enabling Parameter signal is associated with a Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) (e.g., [0100]).
Regarding claim 3:
Xu is silent regarding where the first threshold and the second threshold are established based on network specifications.
Nakagawa teaches the first threshold and the second threshold are established based on network specifications (e.g., [0049], [0069]-[0077]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature the first threshold and the second threshold are established based on network specifications, in order to reduce undesirable frequent connection interruptions.
Regarding claim 4:
Xu is silent regarding the second threshold is set lower than first threshold to provide a buffer against signal strength variations.
Nakagawa teaches the second threshold is set lower than first threshold to provide a buffer against signal strength variations (e.g., [0055], [0059,] RSSI threshold value Th2 in Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature the second threshold is set lower than first threshold to provide a buffer against signal strength variations, in order to reduce undesirable frequent connection interruptions.
Regarding claim 7:
Xu and Nakagawa are silent regarding the processing circuitry is further configured to adjust the first threshold and the second threshold via a user interface by an end user or network administrator. However, network parameters being adjusted via a user interface by an end user or network administrator is well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu and Nakagawa to include the feature the processing circuitry is further configured to adjust the first threshold and the second threshold via a user interface by an end user or network administrator, in order to have more flexibility to configure the network.
Regarding claim 9:
Xu is silent regarding wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to reactivate the P2P communication when the Enabling Parameter signal exceeds the first threshold after a previous deactivation.
Nakagawa teaches reactivating a communication when a Enabling Parameter signal exceeds a first threshold after a previous deactivation (e.g., S304 and S305 in Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature the processing circuitry is further configured to reactivate the P2P communication when the Enabling Parameter signal exceeds the first threshold after a previous deactivation, in order to reduce down time and allow faster connection recovery.
Regarding intendent claim 10:
Xu discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions (e.g., [0048], [0079]) which when executed by one or more processors result in performing operations comprising: identifying an Enabling Parameter signal received from an Access Point (AP); determining if the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses a first threshold; activating a P2P communication with a second device when the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses the first threshold. (See cited prior art and rationales set forth with reject to claim 1 regarding similar features.)
Xu is silent regarding deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value.
Nakagawa teaches deactivating a communication if a Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than a first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value (e.g., [0055], [0059], a second RSSI threshold for stopping data transmission, RSSI threshold value Th2 in Fig. 4, S306 and S307 in Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value, in order to reduce undesirable frequent connection interruptions.
Regarding independent claim 19:
Xu discloses a method comprising: identifying, by one or more processors, an Enabling Parameter signal received from an Access Point (AP); determining if the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses a first threshold; activating a P2P communication with a second device when the Enabling Parameter signal surpasses the first threshold. (See cited prior art and rationales set forth with reject to claim 1 regarding similar features.)
Xu is silent regarding deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value.
Nakagawa teaches deactivating a communication if a Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than a first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value (e.g., [0055], [0059], a second RSSI threshold for stopping data transmission, RSSI threshold value Th2 in Fig. 4, S306 and S307 in Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu based on the teaching from Nakagawa to include the feature deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal descends below a second threshold, wherein the second threshold is a threshold lower than the first threshold or the second threshold is equal to the first threshold minus a delta value, in order to reduce undesirable frequent connection interruptions.
Regarding claims 11-13, 16, 18, and 20:
See rejections of claims 2-4, 7, and 9 for similar features.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu and Nakagawa, and further in view of Denis et al. (US 2014/0287776 A1, hereinafter “Denis”).
Regarding claims 5 and 14:
Xu is silent regarding wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to dynamically adjust the first threshold and the second threshold in response to lognormal distribution of signal fading.
Nakagawa teaches dynamically adjusting the first threshold and the second threshold (e.g., [0069]-[0077], adjusting threshold values based on signal strength values).
Denis teaches determining the strength of received signal based on a lognormal shadowing pathloss model (e.g., [0013], [0036]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu and Nakagawa based on the teaching from Denis to include the feature the processing circuitry is further configured to dynamically adjust the first threshold and the second threshold in response to lognormal distribution of signal fading, in order to reduce undesirable repeated frequent connection interruption and reconnection in an environment with presence of obstacles.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu and Nakagawa, and further in view of Nelson et al. (US 2023/0302352 A1, hereinafter “Nelson”).
Regarding claims 6 and 15:
Xu and Nakagawa are silent regarding wherein deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal stays below the second threshold for a predefined period.
Nelson teaches deactivating a communication if an Enabling Parameter signal stays below a threshold for a predefined period (e.g., [0036], claim 6, connection terminated only after a predetermined period of time).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu and Nakagawa based on the teaching from Nelson to include the feature deactivating the P2P communication if the Enabling Parameter signal stays below the second threshold for a predefined period, in order to prevent unwanted premature connection termination.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu and Nakagawa, and further in view of Chhabra (US 2009/0103503 A1, hereinafter “Chhabra”).
Regarding claims 8 and 17:
Xu and Nakagawa are silent regarding the processing circuitry is further configured to: collect Enabling Parameter signals from multiple APs; and select an AP based on a criteria for the Enabling Parameter signal for P2P communication establishment.
Chhabra teaches a user equipment collects Enabling Parameter signals from multiple APs and selects an AP based on a criteria (e.g., [0005], [0031], [0037])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the inventio to modify the system of Xu and Nakagawa based on the teaching from Chhabra to include the feature the processing circuitry is further configured to: collect Enabling Parameter signals from multiple APs; and select an AP based on a criteria for the Enabling Parameter signal for P2P communication establishment, in order to optimize channel quality for user equipment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alvin ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6am-9am and 2pm-7pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/BO HUI A ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights