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 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 – 4, 8 – 12, and 15 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeong et al. (Patent No.: US 11,388,622; hereinafter Jeong).
Regarding claim 1, Jeong discloses a device, comprising: one or more processors (see claim 3, Fig. 1, a RCAF 150 (ex: network entity) includes at least one processor) configured to: monitor Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”) of a radio access network (“RAN”) that implements a first radio access technology (“RAT”) (see col. 6 lines 9 – 13, col. 9 lines 8 – 10, col. 12 lines 65 – 67, collects statistical information from the OAM of the base station 110-1 which is associated to E-UTRAN network); determine, based on monitoring the KPIs of the RAN, that a particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 10 – 12, col. 9 lines 16 – 28, col. 13 lines 4 – 12, The RCAF 150 determines whether congestion is generated on the basis of the collected statistical information); and notify a Fixed Wireless Access (“FWA”) device (see col. 6 lines 36 – 40, col. 10 lines 28 – 31, col. 11 lines 1 – 10, the RCAF 150 sends (ex: notify) information on the congested area to the ANDSF 160), that is wirelessly connected to the RAN via the first RAT and that is also wirelessly connected to a plurality of client devices via a second RAT (see Fig. 1, col. 60 – 65, With the evolution of the wireless communication system, wireless networks by various radio access technologies (RATs) coexist in a current wireless communication environment for providing services to terminals), that the particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 35 – 38, col. 10 lines 11 – 20, lines 45 – 60, The ANDSF 160 may receive congested area information detected by the RCAF 150), wherein the FWA device implements one or more policies for communications between the FWA device and the plurality of client devices based on receiving the notification that the particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 36 – 40, col. 10 lines 28 – 31, col. 11 lines 1 – 10, … the ANDSF 160 receives congested area information including ID information of a specific ell determined as the congested area from the RCAF 150 and updates the access policy on the basis of the received cell ID information. At this time, the ANDSF 160 may configure the access policy such that the terminal cannot access the cell ID corresponding to the congested area).
Regarding claim 2, Jeong discloses wherein one or more processors are further configured to: provide the one or more policies to the FWA device via the particular RAN (see col. 10 lines 20 – 32, updates the access policy on the basis of the received congested area information…and updates the access policy on the basis of the received cell ID information).
Regarding claim 3, Jeong discloses wherein the first RAT includes at least one of: a Fifth Generation (“5G”) RAT, or a Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) RAT; and wherein the second RAT includes a WiFi RAT (see col. 1 lines 60 – 67, LTE and Wi-Fi, col. 4 lines 47 – 49, 5G).
Regarding claim 4, Jeong discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include one or more KPIs that are not detectable by the FWA device (see col. 9 lines 50 – 57, a problem such as service disconnection).
Regarding claim 8, Jeong discloses a device, comprising: one or more processors (see claim 1, col. 7 lines 35 – 40, ANDSF includes at least one processor) configured to: connect to a radio access network (“RAN”) via a first radio access technology (“RAT”); connect to a plurality of client devices via a second RAT (see Fig. 1, col. 60 – 65, With the evolution of the wireless communication system, wireless networks by various radio access technologies (RATs) coexist in a current wireless communication environment for providing services to terminals); receive one or more policies for communications with the plurality of client devices via the second RAT (see col. 10 lines 20 – 32, updates the access policy on the basis of the received congested area information…and updates the access policy on the basis of the received cell ID information); receive a notification, wherein the notification is determined based on Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”) associated with the RAN (see col. 6 lines 35 – 38, col. 10 lines 11 – 20, lines 45 – 60, The ANDSF 160 may receive congested area information detected by the RCAF 150); and implement the one or more policies for communications with the plurality of client devices based on the notification (see col. 6 lines 36 – 40, col. 10 lines 28 – 31, col. 11 lines 1 – 10, … the ANDSF 160 receives congested area information including ID information of a specific ell determined as the congested area from the RCAF 150 and updates the access policy on the basis of the received cell ID information. At this time, the ANDSF 160 may configure the access policy such that the terminal cannot access the cell ID corresponding to the congested area).
Regarding claim 9, Jeong discloses wherein the notification is provided to the device based on a determination that a particular RAN condition has occurred with respect to the first RAN, wherein the determination that the particular RAN condition has occurred is based on monitoring the KPIs associated with the RAN (see col. 10 lines 45 – 60, …receives a message including congested area information from the RCAF. According to an embodiment, the ANDSF 160 may receive a message including information on the congested area from the RCAF 150 for determining the congested area within the 3GPP network).
Regarding claim 10, Jeong discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: route communications, received via the RAN, to one or more client devices of the plurality of client devices via the second RAT; and route communications, received from the one or more client devices via the second RAT, to the RAN (see col. 11 lines 14 – 25, the ANDSF 160 may update the ANDSF policy by changing routing policy (rule) information of the ANDSF policy that matches the cell ID corresponding to the congested area to prevent the terminal from accessing the cell ID corresponding to the congested area).
Regarding claim 11, Jeong discloses wherein the first RAT includes at least one of: a Fifth Generation (“5G”) RAT, or a Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) RAT; and wherein the second RAT includes a WiFi RAT (see col. 1 lines 60 – 67, LTE and Wi-Fi, col. 4 lines 47 – 49, 5G).
Regarding claim 12, Jeong discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include one or more KPIs that are not detectable by the device (see col. 9 lines 50 – 57, a problem such as service disconnection).
Regarding claim 15, Jeong discloses a method, comprising: monitoring Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”) of a radio access network (“RAN”) that implements a first radio access technology (“RAT”) (see col. 6 lines 9 – 13, col. 9 lines 8 – 10, col. 12 lines 65 – 67, collects statistical information from the OAM of the base station 110-1 which is associated to E-UTRAN network); determining, based on monitoring the KPIs of the RAN, that a particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 10 – 12, col. 9 lines 16 – 28, col. 13 lines 4 – 12, The RCAF 150 determines whether congestion is generated on the basis of the collected statistical information); and notifying a Fixed Wireless Access (“FWA”) device (see col. 6 lines 36 – 40, col. 10 lines 28 – 31, col. 11 lines 1 – 10, the RCAF 150 sends (ex: notify) information on the congested area to the ANDSF 160), that is wirelessly connected to the RAN via the first RAT and that is also wirelessly connected to a plurality of client devices via a second RAT (see Fig. 1, col. 60 – 65, With the evolution of the wireless communication system, wireless networks by various radio access technologies (RATs) coexist in a current wireless communication environment for providing services to terminals), that the particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 35 – 38, col. 10 lines 11 – 20, lines 45 – 60, The ANDSF 160 may receive congested area information detected by the RCAF 150), wherein the FWA device implements one or more policies for communications between the FWA device and the plurality of client devices based on receiving the notification that the particular RAN condition has occurred (see col. 6 lines 36 – 40, col. 10 lines 28 – 31, col. 11 lines 1 – 10, … the ANDSF 160 receives congested area information including ID information of a specific ell determined as the congested area from the RCAF 150 and updates the access policy on the basis of the received cell ID information. At this time, the ANDSF 160 may configure the access policy such that the terminal cannot access the cell ID corresponding to the congested area).
Regarding claim 16, Jeong discloses wherein the first RAT includes at least one of: a Fifth Generation (“5G”) RAT, or a Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) RAT; and wherein the second RAT includes a WiFi RAT (see col. 1 lines 60 – 67, LTE and Wi-Fi, col. 4 lines 47 – 49, 5G).
Regarding claim 17, Jeong discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include one or more KPIs that are not detectable by the FWA device (see col. 9 lines 50 – 57, a problem such as service disconnection).
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 5, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (Patent No.: US 11,388,622; hereinafter Jeong) in view of Polehn et al. (Pub. No.: US 2015/0138989; hereinafter Polehn).
Jeong does not disclose the claimed features as recited in claims 5, 13 and 18.
Regarding claim 5, Polehn discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include at least one of: a quantity of User Equipment (“UEs”) connected to one or more base stations of the RAN, an amount of available radio resources of the RAN, a measure of latency between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations (see abstract, at least one key performance indicator (KPI) for each of the plurality of network components of network 100, para. 0011, 0017, 0024, the KPIs may include jitter, frame loss, latency, or other measure of the data transmission performance of network 100), a measure of throughput between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations, or a measure of jitter between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations.
Regarding claim 13, Polehn discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include at least one of: a quantity of User Equipment (“UEs”) connected to one or more base stations of the RAN, an amount of available radio resources of the RAN, a measure of latency between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations (see abstract, at least one key performance indicator (KPI) for each of the plurality of network components of network 100, para. 0011, 0017, 0024, the KPIs may include jitter, frame loss, latency, or other measure of the data transmission performance of network 100), a measure of throughput between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations, or a measure of jitter between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations.
Regarding claim 18, Polehn discloses wherein the KPIs of the RAN include at least one of: a quantity of User Equipment (“UEs”) connected to one or more base stations of the RAN, an amount of available radio resources of the RAN, a measure of latency between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations (see abstract, at least one key performance indicator (KPI) for each of the plurality of network components of network 100, para. 0011, 0017, 0024, the KPIs may include jitter, frame loss, latency, or other measure of the data transmission performance of network 100), a measure of throughput between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations, or a measure of jitter between the one or more base stations of the RAN and one or more UEs that are connected to the one or more base stations.
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Jeong, and have the features, as taught by Polehn, in order to provide systems for monitoring network performance and matching performance changes/degradation to root-cause components and identify the solutions. The systems may be used in conjunction with self-optimizing tools to ensure peak performance of the network, as discussed by Polehn (para. 0012).
Claims 6, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (Patent No.: US 11,388,622; hereinafter Jeong) in view of Henry et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0417755; hereinafter Henry).
Jeong does not disclose the claimed features as recited in claims 6, 14 and 19.
Regarding claim 6, Henry discloses wherein implementing the one or more policies includes at least one of: implementing a maximum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices (see para. 0088, 0094, a policy limits, in some embodiments, a maximum network throughput or video resolution to be conveyed via the session of the wireless client device), implementing a minimum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices, or implementing a minimum latency for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices.
Regarding claim 14, Henry discloses wherein implementing the one or more policies includes at least one of: implementing a maximum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices (see para. 0088, 0094, a policy limits, in some embodiments, a maximum network throughput or video resolution to be conveyed via the session of the wireless client device), implementing a minimum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices, or implementing a minimum latency for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices.
Regarding claim 19, Henry discloses wherein implementing the one or more policies includes at least one of: implementing a maximum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices (see para. 0088, 0094, a policy limits, in some embodiments, a maximum network throughput or video resolution to be conveyed via the session of the wireless client device), implementing a minimum throughput for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices, or implementing a minimum latency for one or more client devices, of the plurality of client devices.
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Jeong, and have the features, as taught by Henry, in order to provide for improved integration between the authentication service 108 and a wireless client device that is rotating its device address, as discussed by Henry (para. 0048).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anh Ngoc M Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 270-5139. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, from 7:30 am to 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kwang Bin Yao can be reached on ((571) 272-3182. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 .
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANH NGOC M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights