DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/06/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 7-12, 14-18, 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lushear (Pat 9001685) in view of Svennebring (Pub No 20190104458) and newly cited ハイム ポラット (JP 2008532358 A)
Regarding claim 1,
Althought the examiner had indicated the independent claims 6, 13, and 19 were objected as being allowable, further search has deemed that the subject matter is taught by the new reference ハイム ポラット (JP 2008532358 A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8, 10-11, 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushear (Pat 9001685) in view of Svennebring (Pub No 20190104458) and ハイム ポラット (JP 2008532358 A)
Regarding claim 1 and 8 and 15,
Lushear teaches a method for optimizing a performance of a customer premises equipment (CPE) in a wireless network, comprising:
One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a network apparatus, cause the network apparatus to perform operations, the operations comprising: (see processor and memory, see col 12 line 14-40)
A network apparatus, comprising: at least one processor comprising processing circuitry; a memory; and a customer premises equipment (CPE) performance controller comprising circuitry, coupled with at least one processor and the memory, configured to: (see processor and memory, see col 12 line 14-40)
receiving, by a network apparatus, first measurement information from at least one customer premises equipment (CPE); (interpreted as CPE measurements collected see col 9 line 6-19)
receiving, by the network apparatus, second measurement information from at least one radio access node (RAN) node; (interpreted as router measurements collected see col 9 line 6-19)
detecting, by the network apparatus, whether a performance associated with at least one CPE is degraded based on the first measurement information; (interpreted as in response to the method determining that the CPE measurements and the router measurements are abnormal, the method identifies a cause of the abnormal measurements. In an embodiment, identifying the cause of abnormal measurements may include identifying a configuration mismatch between the CPE configuration and the router configuration. In an embodiment, if router 104 is determined to be dropping an amount of bytes, or packets, from the CPE 102 at an abnormal rate for the class of service defined in the SLA, the method identifies a cause of the abnormal measurements, see col 10 line 13-17)
identifying, by the network apparatus, a user equipment for the at least one CPE whose performance is degraded by correlating the first measurement information received and the second measurement information; and (interpreted as In an embodiment, the method may contain a set of rules to apply for comparing the CPE measurements and the router measurements and determining whether the measurements are normal in light of the association created between CPE 102 and router 104. In some instances, a customer may perceive a problem with the performance of the communication service even when the performance is in-line with the SLA for the communication service, see col 9 line 30-37. Also see the association is created between a device ID of CPE 102 and a port 110 of router 104, see col 7 line 25-30)
applying, by the network apparatus, an action based on the identified RAN UE ID. (interpreted as troubleshooting tool 132 may perform analysis to identify a cause for the problem and take corrective action, see col 11 line 45-50)
However, Lushear does not teach RAN UE ID for the user equipment.
Svennebring teaches RAN UE ID. (interpreted as network router, the apparatus comprising: memory; and processing circuitry configured to: decode an indication of a handover of a user equipment (UE) from a first end point (EP) to a second EP, the indication including a UE identifier; update a relocation table stored in the memory, see para [0182])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the port identifier as taught by Lushear with the UE identifier as taught by Svennebring with the motivation being that it would be obvious to try to use a different identifier for associating devices.
Lushear in view of Svennebring teach the mapping of the CPE ID to the RAN UE ID however do not teach the mapping created and updated in a periodic manner over an offline mode.
ハイム ポラット teaches mapping created and updated in a periodic manner over an offline mode. (interpreted as This exemplary network is an offline algorithm that calculates and periodically updates a routing table for each network device in the network based on a network topology, network load statistics, and a set of quality of service guarantee (SLA), see pg 6 line 35-45)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the mapping as taught by Lushear in view of Svennebring with the offline mapping as taught by ハイム ポラット with the motivation being to ensure that all required traffic is forwarded over the network in a reasonable amount of time.
Regarding claim 3 and 10,
Lushear teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each of the first measurement information and the second measurement information comprises at least one of a latency, a reference signal received power (RSRP), a signal to interference noise ratio (SINR), a reference signal received quality, (RSRQ), a channel quality indicator (CQI), throughput, and a received signal strength indicator (RSSI). (interpreted as operational parameters or measurements of the performance of the communication service at the router 104 and/or the port 110, for example a current queue depth, an average queue depth, a maximum queue depth, an offered throughput rate, a packet drop rate, incoming packet rate, number of incoming packets, outgoing packet rate, number of outgoing packets, and other parameters, see col 6 line 20-30)
Regarding claim 4 and 11 and 17,
Lushear teaches the method of claim 1, wherein correlating, by the network apparatus, the first measurement information and the second measurement information comprises: correlating the first measurement information comprising at least one key performance indicator (KPI) received from the at least one CPE and second measurement information comprising at least one KPI received from the at least one RAN node; and dynamically creating a mapping between the first measurement information comprising the at least one KPI received from the at least one CPE and the second measurement information comprising the at least one KPI received from the at least one RAN node. (interpreted as In an embodiment, the method may contain a set of rules to apply for comparing the CPE measurements and the router measurements and determining whether the measurements are normal in light of the association created between CPE 102 and router 104. In some instances, a customer may perceive a problem with the performance of the communication service even when the performance is in-line with the SLA for the communication service, see col 9 line 30-37. Also see the association is created between a device ID of CPE 102 and a port 110 of router 104, see col 7 line 25-30)
Claim(s) 2, 7, 9, 14, 16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushear (Pat 9001685) in view of Svennebring (Pub No 20190104458), ハイム ポラット (JP 2008532358 A), and Aguirre (Pub No 20120106346)
Regarding claim 2 and 9 and 16,
Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラットteaches the method of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the action comprises at least one of a forced handover of the CPE to a less loaded cell in the RAN node having a connectivity with sufficient signal strength towards the at least one CPE, a throughput enhancement, and a traffic reduction.
Aguirre teaches wherein the action comprises at least one of a forced handover of the CPE to a less loaded cell in the RAN node having a connectivity with sufficient signal strength towards the at least one CPE, a throughput enhancement, and a traffic reduction. (interpreted as The load balancing application may determine that a handover operation is to be performed when a particular base station 130 and/or a particular cell associated with the particular base station 130 from which CPE device 110 receives traffic, have not reached capacity, but are not, or will not be capable of carrying GOS-compliant traffic.…the load balancing application may determine that traffic throughput, signal strength, signal quality, etc. associated with CPE device 110, at the present point in time, may increase to a point that the traffic no longer complies with the target GOS based on the bandwidth and/or throughput requirements associated with the applications, television content, services, etc. used by CPE device 110. Alternatively, or additionally, when determining the traffic throughput, signal strength, signal quality, etc, see para [0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the measurements as taught by Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラット with the handover as taught by Aguirre with the motivation being to meet the quality requirements for the device.
Regarding claim 7 and 14 and 20,
Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラットteaches the method of claim 1, however does not teach wherein the network apparatus provides at least one CPE prediction model to assist for applying the action based on the identified RAN UE ID.
Aguirre teaches wherein the network apparatus provides at least one CPE prediction model to assist for applying the action based on the identified RAN UE ID. (interpreted as In yet another example, the load balancing application may use historical data and/or trend data, associated with traffic loading conditions within environment 100, to determine whether and/or when to perform a load balancing operation. For example, if base station 130 is processing traffic at or near capacity and the trend data indicates that the quantity of traffic is projected to increase, then the load balancing application may cause a load balancing operation to be performed by transferring a portion of the traffic from based station 130 to another base station 130 that has available loading capacity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the measurements as taught by Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラットwith the handover as taught by Aguirre with the motivation being to meet the quality requirements for the device.
Claim(s) 5, 12, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lushear (Pat 9001685) in view of Svennebring (Pub No 20190104458), ハイム ポラット (JP 2008532358 A) , and Butt (Pub No 20220264514)
Regarding claim 5 and 12 and 18,
Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラットteaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first measurement information and the second measurement information are correlated using a correlation technique comprising at least one of a Pearson correlation technique, Spearman correlation technique, Kendal-Tau correlation technique and dynamic time warping (DTW) technique.
Butt teaches wherein the first measurement information and the second measurement information are correlated using a correlation technique comprising at least one of a Pearson correlation technique, Spearman correlation technique, Kendal-Tau correlation technique and dynamic time warping (DTW) technique. (interpreted as Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) values between RSRP measurements and various Key Performance indicators, KPIs, such as Channel Quality Indicator CQI, received Signal Strength Indicator RSSI, Signal to Noise Ratio SINR1, SINR2, Reference Signal Received Quality RSRQ, see para [0095])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the comparison as taught by Lushear in view of Svennebring, and ハイム ポラットwith the correlation techniques for comparison as taught by Aguirre with the motivation being to use known techniques for comparing information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO G NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10pm - 6:30pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/BAO G NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights