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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
DOUBLE PATENTING REJECTION #1
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11,13,14, and 16-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,909,649 (referred to as P649). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Re claim 1:
Claim 1 merely broaden the scope of claim 1 of P649. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Re claim 2: Claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 4 of P649.
Re claim 3: Claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 2 of P649.
Re claim 4: Claim 4 is substantially similar to claim 3 of P649.
Re claim 5: Claim 5 is substantially similar to claim 4 of P649.
Re claim 6: Claim 6 is substantially similar to claim 5 of P649.
Re claim 7: Claim 7 is substantially similar to claim 6 of P649.
Re claim 8: Claim 8 is substantially similar to claim 7 of P649.
Re claim 9: Claim 9 is substantially similar to claim 8 of P649.
Re claim 10:
Claim 10 merely broaden the scope of claim 9 of P649. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Re claim 11: Claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 10 of P649.
Re claim 12: Claim 12 is substantially similar to claim 11 of P649.
Re claim 13: Claim 13 is substantially similar to claim 10 of P649.
Re claim 14: Claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 13 of P649.
Re claim 15:
Claim 15 merely broaden the scope of claim 14 of P649. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Re claim 16: Claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 16 of P649.
Re claim 17: Claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 17 of P649.
Re claim 18: Claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 18 of P649.
Re claim 19: Claim 19 is substantially similar to claim 19 of P649.
Re claim 20: Claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 20 of P649.
DOUBLE PATENTING REJECTION #2
Claim rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. U.S. Patent No. 11,284,300 (referred to as P300) in view of Kim (US 20180054749).
Re claim 1:
Claim 1 merely broaden the scope of claim 1 of P300. It is well settled that broadening the scope of claims would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the narrower issued claims. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) and In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
P300 does not explicitly disclose redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices
Kim discloses redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices (Para. [0021]).
Re claim 2: Claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 4 of P300.
Re claim 3: Claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 2 of P300.
Re claim 4: Claim 4 is substantially similar to claim 3 of P300.
Re claim 5: Claim 5 is substantially similar to claim 4 of P300.
Re claim 6: Claim 6 is substantially similar to claim 2 of P300.
Re claim 7: Claim 7 is substantially similar to claim 1 of P300.
Re claim 8: Claim 8 is substantially similar to claim 2 of P300. Examiner Note: streaming and non-streaming are types of data.
Re claim 9: Claim 9 is substantially similar to claim 2 of P300. Examiner Note: streaming and non-streaming are types of data.
Re claim 10: Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1.
Re claim 11: Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Re claim 12: Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Re claim 13: Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 5.
Re claim 14: Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 9.
Re claim 15: Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1.
Re claim 16: Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 8.
Re claim 17: Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 6.
Re claim 18: Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Re claim 19: Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Re claim 20: P300 does not explicitly disclose updating based on a time of day. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention time of day affects the usage and hence the migration. Yang (US 20180049108) is further evidence relied upon (Para.[0078).
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.
Claim(s) 1-6,8,10-13, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (US 20160338086) in view of Hong (US 20160205591) and Kim (US 20180054749).
Re claim 1:
Zhou discloses a method comprising: monitoring, by a computing device, a total traffic load on a plurality of channels that are used by a transceiver to communicate with a plurality of devices (Para.[0083] One example scanning and hopping operation of a hopping AP will now be described. A hopping AP may initiate scanning for a new primary channel across an entire WiFi bandwidth. For example, the scanning may be initiated if a total load on a current primary channel is greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, etc.) and a total medium usage (MU) of the hopping AP's own BSS nodes (e.g., STAs) is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, etc.));
monitoring, by the computing device, a traffic load on one of the plurality of channels (Fig.3A and Para.[0083] One example scanning and hopping operation of a hopping AP will now be described. A hopping AP may initiate scanning for a new primary channel across an entire WiFi bandwidth. For example, the scanning may be initiated if a total load on a current primary channel is greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, etc.) and a total medium usage (MU) of the hopping AP's own BSS nodes (e.g., STAs) is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, etc.));
migrating, by the computing device, based on the monitored total traffic load and the monitored traffic load on the one of the plurality of channels, data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to one or more other channels of the plurality of channels, (Para.[0075] The AP may then change its current operating channel (e.g., channel 302, 80 MHZ Ch1) by hopping to a lightly loaded channel to exploit the short-term “frequency hole” (lightly loaded channel)); and
Zhou does not explicitly disclose wherein different types of data traffic are migrated to different channels.
Hong discloses wherein different types of data traffic are migrated to different channels (Para.[[0066] Then at block 204 the UE utilizes the threshold corresponding to a given type of data (or thresholds if there are multiple thresholds per data type) to evaluate whether an access node operating in the wireless local area network is suitable for offloading data of the given type. In the FIG. 1 example this access node of the wireless local area network that is evaluated is operating in the license-exempt band and is the WLAN AP 24 and Para. [0067] And finally at block 206 the UE utilizes the evaluated access node for offloading only the data of the given type, and only if the access node is determined to be suitable).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include migrating based on data type as taught by Hong in order to improve network an UE experience (Hong Para.[0064]).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices.
Kim discloses redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices (Para. [0021] Thus, upon small access node 120 determining a load imbalance caused by, for instance, congestion due to end-user wireless devices 135 requesting services therefrom, small access node 120 can perform load balancing operations that encourage end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to request a handover from the congested frequency band of small access node 120 to a non-congested frequency band of access node 113. For example, in order to trigger offloading of end-user devices 133, 134 from band class BAND1 to BAND2, small access node 120 can transmit updated handovers thresholds to end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to increase a threshold minimum signal level associated with band class BAND1, and to decrease a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND2. Thus, when wireless devices 133, 134 monitor measurements of signals in both coverage areas 121 and 112, they is more likely to determine, due to the adjusted handover thresholds, that a signal in band class BAND1 is below the increased threshold minimum and, therefore, request a handover to band class BAND2, which is within the reduced threshold maximum. Pushing these devices to other frequency bands or band classes can therefore help alleviate congestion in a specific band class. Moreover, access node 113 also performs operations to prevent devices attached thereto from requesting handovers to band class BAND1. These operations generally include decreasing a threshold minimum signal level associated with its own signal, i.e. band class BAND2, and increasing a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND1 and transmitting adjusted handover thresholds to devices connected thereto. See, for instance, FIGS. 5 and 9).
Zhou and Kim are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include redirecting requests as taught by Kim in order to reduce back and forth handovers (Zhou Para.[0001]).
Re claim 2:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a payload size of the data traffic on the one of the plurality channels.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a payload size of the data traffic on the one of the plurality channels (Para.[[0066] Then at block 204 the UE utilizes the threshold corresponding to a given type of data (or thresholds if there are multiple thresholds per data type) to evaluate whether an access node operating in the wireless local area network is suitable for offloading data of the given type. In the FIG. 1 example this access node of the wireless local area network that is evaluated is operating in the license-exempt band and is the WLAN AP 24 and Para. [0067] And finally at block 206 the UE utilizes the evaluated access node for offloading only the data of the given type, and only if the access node is determined to be suitable).
As shown above, Hong discloses migrating based on the data type. Hong does not explicitly disclose migrating based on a payload size. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention migrating based on packet size is as an obvious variant of migrating based on data type because different types of data have different packet sizes and different transmission requirements.
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include migrating based on packet size as taught by Hong in order to improve network an UE experience (Hong Para.[0064]).
Re claim 3:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a data type of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a data type of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels (Para.[[0066] Then at block 204 the UE utilizes the threshold corresponding to a given type of data (or thresholds if there are multiple thresholds per data type) to evaluate whether an access node operating in the wireless local area network is suitable for offloading data of the given type. In the FIG. 1 example this access node of the wireless local area network that is evaluated is operating in the license-exempt band and is the WLAN AP 24 and Para. [0067] And finally at block 206 the UE utilizes the evaluated access node for offloading only the data of the given type, and only if the access node is determined to be suitable).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include migrating based on data type as taught by Hong in order to improve network an UE experience (Hong Para.[0064]).
Re claim 4:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on an expansion rate of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on an expansion rate of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded).
Hong does not explicitly disclose an “based on an expansion rate of the data traffic”. Applicant’s specification defines “to allow for expansion” in terms of the type of data (Para.[0036] of specification as filed - For example, for unpredictable data such as voice data generated by phone calls, the threshold to trigger channel migration may be lower to allow space for the data expansion. Alternatively, for streaming video data with a steady expansion rate, the threshold to trigger channel migration may be higher). Therefore different data types have different “expansion rate” and the threshold is different for different data type. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include based on an expansion rate of the data traffic because the data type dictates the expansion.
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 5:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to the one or more other channels after a determination that a packet size on the one of the plurality of channels is below a threshold.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to the one or more other channels after a determination that a packet size on the one of the plurality of channels is below a threshold (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded).
Hong does not explicitly disclose migrating after a determination that a packet size is below a threshold. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to migrate when a packet size is below a threshold as an obvious variant of migrating based on data type because different types of data have different packet sizes and different transmission requirements.
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 6:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a volatility of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality channels to the one or more other channels is further based on a volatility of the data traffic on the one of the plurality of channels (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded and Para.[0065] The first set of thresholds comprises different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded, such as for example delay intolerant data and delay tolerant data, wherein the delay intolerant data comprises at least voice and video data and the delay tolerant data comprises at least file transfer protocol (FTP) data and Internet (www or more specifically http/https) data that is not also voice or video data – Examiner Note: delay intolerant and delay tolerant data are different types of volatility).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 8:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the different types of data traffic comprise streaming data traffic and non-streaming data traffic, and wherein migrating the data traffic comprises: migrating the streaming data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to a second channel; and migrating the non-streaming data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to a third channel.
Hong discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the different types of data traffic comprise streaming data traffic and non-streaming data traffic, and wherein migrating the data traffic comprises: migrating the streaming data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to a second channel; and migrating the non-streaming data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels to a third channel (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded and Para.[0065] The first set of thresholds comprises different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded, such as for example delay intolerant data and delay tolerant data, wherein the delay intolerant data comprises at least voice and video data and the delay tolerant data comprises at least file transfer protocol (FTP) data and Internet (www or more specifically http/https) data that is not also voice or video data – Examiner Note: video data is streaming data and FTP data is non-streaming).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 10:
Zhou discloses a method comprising: configuring, by a computing device, a plurality of channels associated with a transceiver, wherein the transceiver communicates with a plurality of devices via the plurality of channels (Fig.1 ref.106 shows a plurality of devices and ref. 104 is a transceiver and Fig.3A shows a plurality of channels);
configuring, by the computing device, migration rules on migrating data traffic from one of the plurality of channels to one or more other channels of the plurality of channels based on a traffic load on the one of the plurality of channels and a total traffic load on the plurality of channels, (Fig.3A and Para.[0083] One example scanning and hopping operation of a hopping AP will now be described. A hopping AP may initiate scanning for a new primary channel across an entire WiFi bandwidth. For example, the scanning may be initiated if a total load on a current primary channel is greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, etc.) and a total medium usage (MU) of the hopping AP's own BSS nodes (e.g., STAs) is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, etc.)); and
managing the data traffic based on the migration rules (Para.[0075] The AP may then change its current operating channel (e.g., channel 302, 80 MHZ Ch1) by hopping to a lightly loaded channel to exploit the short-term “frequency hole” (lightly loaded channel)); and
Zhou does not explicitly disclose migration rules; wherein the migration rules indicate that different types of data traffic are migrated to different channels.
Hong discloses migration rules (Para.[0043] There may in this embodiment also be AP selection criteria that is different for different traffic types. The network also provides to the UE a rule or algorithm for making its final decision as to which AP to offload which of the UE's services (data types) based on the inputs of UE type (which may be implemented as the UE's E-UTRAN/UTRAN subscription type), AP type, thresholds for those types, traffic type to be offloaded, and so forth);
wherein the migration rules indicate that different types of data traffic are migrated to different channels (Para.[[0066] Then at block 204 the UE utilizes the threshold corresponding to a given type of data (or thresholds if there are multiple thresholds per data type) to evaluate whether an access node operating in the wireless local area network is suitable for offloading data of the given type. In the FIG. 1 example this access node of the wireless local area network that is evaluated is operating in the license-exempt band and is the WLAN AP 24 and Para. [0067] And finally at block 206 the UE utilizes the evaluated access node for offloading only the data of the given type, and only if the access node is determined to be suitable).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include migrating based on data type as taught by Hong in order to improve network an UE experience (Hong Para.[0064]).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices.
Kim discloses redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices (Para. [0021] Thus, upon small access node 120 determining a load imbalance caused by, for instance, congestion due to end-user wireless devices 135 requesting services therefrom, small access node 120 can perform load balancing operations that encourage end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to request a handover from the congested frequency band of small access node 120 to a non-congested frequency band of access node 113. For example, in order to trigger offloading of end-user devices 133, 134 from band class BAND1 to BAND2, small access node 120 can transmit updated handovers thresholds to end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to increase a threshold minimum signal level associated with band class BAND1, and to decrease a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND2. Thus, when wireless devices 133, 134 monitor measurements of signals in both coverage areas 121 and 112, they is more likely to determine, due to the adjusted handover thresholds, that a signal in band class BAND1 is below the increased threshold minimum and, therefore, request a handover to band class BAND2, which is within the reduced threshold maximum. Pushing these devices to other frequency bands or band classes can therefore help alleviate congestion in a specific band class. Moreover, access node 113 also performs operations to prevent devices attached thereto from requesting handovers to band class BAND1. These operations generally include decreasing a threshold minimum signal level associated with its own signal, i.e. band class BAND2, and increasing a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND1 and transmitting adjusted handover thresholds to devices connected thereto. See, for instance, FIGS. 5 and 9).
Zhou and Kim are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include redirecting requests as taught by Kim in order to reduce back and forth handovers (Zhou Para.[0001]).
Re claim 11: Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Re claim 12: Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Re claim 13: Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 3.
Re claim 15:
Zhou discloses a method comprising: migrating, by a computing device, data traffic from a first channel to a plurality of channels associated with a transceiver, wherein the transceiver communicates with a plurality of devices via the plurality of channels (Fig.1 ref.106 shows a plurality of devices and ref. 104 is a transceiver and Fig.3A shows a plurality of channels), and
wherein the migrating is based on: a traffic load of the first channel, a total traffic load of both the first channel and the plurality of channels, and (Fig.3A and Para.[0083] One example scanning and hopping operation of a hopping AP will now be described. A hopping AP may initiate scanning for a new primary channel across an entire WiFi bandwidth. For example, the scanning may be initiated if a total load on a current primary channel is greater than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, etc.) and a total medium usage (MU) of the hopping AP's own BSS nodes (e.g., STAs) is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, etc.));
updating, based on migrating, a migration rule associated with one of the plurality of channels (Para.[0075] The AP may then change its current operating channel (e.g., channel 302, 80 MHZ Ch1) by hopping to a lightly loaded channel to exploit the short-term “frequency hole” (lightly loaded channel)); and
Zhou does not explicitly disclose different migration rules for different types of data traffic.
Hong discloses migration rules (Para.[0043] There may in this embodiment also be AP selection criteria that is different for different traffic types. The network also provides to the UE a rule or algorithm for making its final decision as to which AP to offload which of the UE's services (data types) based on the inputs of UE type (which may be implemented as the UE's E-UTRAN/UTRAN subscription type), AP type, thresholds for those types, traffic type to be offloaded, and so forth);
different migration rules for different types of data traffic (Para.[[0066] Then at block 204 the UE utilizes the threshold corresponding to a given type of data (or thresholds if there are multiple thresholds per data type) to evaluate whether an access node operating in the wireless local area network is suitable for offloading data of the given type. In the FIG. 1 example this access node of the wireless local area network that is evaluated is operating in the license-exempt band and is the WLAN AP 24 and Para. [0067] And finally at block 206 the UE utilizes the evaluated access node for offloading only the data of the given type, and only if the access node is determined to be suitable).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include migrating based on data type as taught by Hong in order to improve network an UE experience (Hong Para.[0064]).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices.
Kim discloses redirecting, by the computing device and to the one or more other channels, future requests associated with the transceiver to communicate with the plurality of devices (Para. [0021] Thus, upon small access node 120 determining a load imbalance caused by, for instance, congestion due to end-user wireless devices 135 requesting services therefrom, small access node 120 can perform load balancing operations that encourage end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to request a handover from the congested frequency band of small access node 120 to a non-congested frequency band of access node 113. For example, in order to trigger offloading of end-user devices 133, 134 from band class BAND1 to BAND2, small access node 120 can transmit updated handovers thresholds to end-user wireless devices 133, 134 to increase a threshold minimum signal level associated with band class BAND1, and to decrease a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND2. Thus, when wireless devices 133, 134 monitor measurements of signals in both coverage areas 121 and 112, they is more likely to determine, due to the adjusted handover thresholds, that a signal in band class BAND1 is below the increased threshold minimum and, therefore, request a handover to band class BAND2, which is within the reduced threshold maximum. Pushing these devices to other frequency bands or band classes can therefore help alleviate congestion in a specific band class. Moreover, access node 113 also performs operations to prevent devices attached thereto from requesting handovers to band class BAND1. These operations generally include decreasing a threshold minimum signal level associated with its own signal, i.e. band class BAND2, and increasing a threshold maximum signal level associated with band class BAND1 and transmitting adjusted handover thresholds to devices connected thereto. See, for instance, FIGS. 5 and 9).
Zhou and Kim are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include redirecting requests as taught by Kim in order to reduce back and forth handovers (Zhou Para.[0001]).
Re claim 16:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 15, wherein updating the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels comprises: increasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises streaming data traffic; and decreasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises non-streaming data traffic.
Hong discloses method of claim 15, wherein updating the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels comprises: increasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises streaming data traffic; and decreasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises non-streaming data traffic (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded and Para.[0065] The first set of thresholds comprises different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded, such as for example delay intolerant data and delay tolerant data, wherein the delay intolerant data comprises at least voice and video data and the delay tolerant data comprises at least file transfer protocol (FTP) data and Internet (www or more specifically http/https) data that is not also voice or video data – Examiner Note: the thresholds can be adjusted higher or lower to increase or decrease the migration likelihood and video data is streaming data and FTP data is non-streaming).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 17:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 15, wherein updating the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels comprises: decreasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises volatile data traffic; and increasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises non-volatile data traffic.
Hong discloses the method of claim 15, wherein updating the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels comprises: decreasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of channels after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises volatile data traffic; and increasing a migration likelihood associated with the one of the plurality of after determining that the one of the plurality of channels comprises non-volatile data traffic (Fig.2 ref. the first set of thresholds comprise different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded and Para.[0065] The first set of thresholds comprises different thresholds corresponding to different types of data to be offloaded, such as for example delay intolerant data and delay tolerant data, wherein the delay intolerant data comprises at least voice and video data and the delay tolerant data comprises at least file transfer protocol (FTP) data and Internet (www or more specifically http/https) data that is not also voice or video data – Examiner Note: the thresholds can be adjusted higher or lower to increase or decrease the migration likelihood and delay intolerant and delay tolerant data are different types of volatility).
Zhou and Hong are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include a threshold based on data type as taught by Hong in order to evaluate where offloading is suitable for a given data type (Hong Para.[0066]).
Re claim 18: Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 2.
Re claim 19: Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 4.
Claim(s) 7 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (US 20160338086) in view of Hong (US 20160205591) and Kim (US 20180054749) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang (US 20180049108).
Re claim 7:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring first microservices for a first set of users; configuring second microservices for a second set of users, wherein the first set of users have a higher priority than the second set of users; and assigning the first microservices to channels with higher frequencies; and assigning the second microservices to channels with lower frequencies.
Yang discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: configuring first microservices for a first set of users; configuring second microservices for a second set of users, wherein the first set of users have a higher priority than the second set of users; and assigning the first microservices to channels with higher frequencies; and assigning the second microservices to channels with lower frequencies (Para.[0059] Software 420 includes an application or a program that provides a function and/or a process. As an example, with reference to wireless station 110 and eNB 210, software 420 may include an application that, when executed by processor 410, provides the functions of the access service, as described herein. Similarly, end device 160 may include an application that, when executed by processor 410, provides the functions of the access service, as described herein and Fig.3 shows different applications with different frequencies and priorities – Examiner Note: the end devices are users and applications are microservices).
Zhou and Yang are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include microservices with different priorities as taught by Yang in order to provide efficient use of resources to support increase in demand by devices (Yang Para.[0013]).
Re claim 20:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 15, wherein the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels is updated based on a time of day.
Yang discloses the method of claim 15, wherein the migration rule associated with the one of the plurality of channels is updated based on a time of day (Para.[0078] For example, the access history may include information pertaining to the number of times an access mode was used for transmitting data, the success rate, the last used, time of day, geographic location of end device 160, and/or any other context information and Para.[0071] In block 560, it is determined whether a loading metric is higher than a threshold and another loading metric is lower than the threshold or another threshold. For example, wireless station 110 determines whether one mode of access is overloaded based on the threshold and corresponding loading metric and another mode of access is underloaded based on the other threshold and corresponding other loading metric).
Zhou and Yang are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include microservices with different priorities as taught by Yang in order to provide efficient use of resources to support increase in demand by devices (Yang Para.[0013]).
Claim(s) 9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (US 20160338086) in view of Hong (US 20160205591) and Kim (US 20180054749) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lehane (US 20120278430).
Re claim 9:
As discussed above, Zhou in view of Hong and Kim meets all the limitations of the parent claims.
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels comprises: reducing a bandwidth for microservices associated with streaming data service; and increasing a bandwidth for microservices associated with non-streaming data service.
Lehane discloses the method of claim 1, wherein migrating the data traffic from the one of the plurality of channels comprises: reducing a bandwidth for microservices associated with streaming data service; and increasing a bandwidth for microservices associated with non-streaming data service (Para.[0163] The continuum orchestrator may request an increase in the allocated quality of service, if there are available network resources within the domain. In an embodiment, a domain may reconfigure its behavior and resources in order to increase the actual quality of service for a specific service by decreasing the allocated quality of service for other services (e.g., a mobile packet core domain may reduce or eliminate the network resources available for video on demand services in order to increase the resources available for video call services). A domain may offload some of its network traffic from one adjacent domain to another adjacent domain in order to increase the allocated quality of service (e.g., a user equipment domain may offload traffic from one radio access network domain to another access network domain)).
As shown above, Lehane discloses adjusting the bandwidth for specific services based on various factors. Lehane does not explicitly state the bandwidth for streaming services is reduced and the bandwidth for non-streaming services is increased; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that these variations are from the limited set of possibilites within the system of Lehane in order to adjust the resource usage based on the application usage.
Zhou and Lehane are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhou to include adjusting the bandwidth for different services as taught by Lehane in order to improve the quality of service (Lehane Para.[0080]).
Re claim 14: Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shanmugham (US 20170041935) discloses migrating based on loads and thresholds.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD SAJID ADHAMI whose telephone number is (571)272-8615. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights