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 April 24, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8-14, 16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madan et al. (US 2017/0208526) in view of Bruhn et al. (US 2024/0196272).
Regarding claim 1, Madan discloses a method, comprising:
identifying, by a network device, a desired minimum uplink (UL) signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) value for a source cell (Madan, paragraph [0015], evaluating handover threshold in relation to a minimum SINR for UE associated with the macro cell; paragraph [0037], SINR is used to describe or quantify signal quality, using parameter ϒ; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR are above a minimum SINR; paragraph [0081], check when HO threshold has been increased beyond a level at which UEs can attain a minimum SINR; paragraph [0093], uplink or downlink SINR can be used for the embodiments herein; paragraph [0134], evaluate handover threshold in relation to minimum SINR);
mapping, by the network device, the minimum UL SINR value to a corresponding downlink (DL) reference signal received power (RSRP) value for the source cell (Madan, paragraph [0015], evaluating handover threshold in relation to a minimum SINR for UE associated with the macro cell; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR above a minimum SINR decoded; paragraph [0081], check when HO threshold has been increased beyond a level at which UEs can attain a minimum SINR; paragraph [0093], uplink or downlink SINR can be used for the embodiments herein; paragraph [0134], evaluate handover threshold in relation to minimum SINR);
determining, by the network device and based on the DL RSRP value, loaded DL RSRP values that reflect interference levels for time periods (Madan, paragraph [0033], providing for load balancing through the use of handover thresholds that can be dynamically optimized; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0037], Signal-to-interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) can be estimated based on RSRP; paragraph [0038], RSRP is measured over RBs; paragraph [0039], RB is a slot spanning .5 milliseconds; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR above a minimum SINR decoded; paragraph [0081], check when HO threshold has been increased beyond a level at which UEs can attain a minimum SINR; paragraph [0093], uplink or downlink SINR can be used for the embodiments herein); and
periodically providing, by the network device, one or more DL RSRP thresholds for implementation in the source cell based on the loaded DL RSRP values (Madan, paragraph [0013], central management system performs setting handover threshold; paragraph [0033], providing for load balancing through the use of handover thresholds that can be dynamically optimized; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0093], uplink or downlink SINR can be used for the embodiments herein; paragraph [0123], operations performed on a periodic basis; paragraph [0126], operations performed on a periodic basis).
Madan does not explicitly disclose determining loaded DL RSRP values that reflect predicted interference levels for different future time periods.
Bruhn discloses determining loaded values that reflect predicted interference levels for different future time periods (Bruhn, paragraph [0016], predicting a change in load and/or interference; paragraph [0034], traffic status information includes predictions of traffic for one or more future time intervals; paragraph [0204], RSRP).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the teachings of Bruhn to Madan to provide an improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic in the invention of Madan. The motivation to combine the references would have been to provide improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic (see Bruhn, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Bruhn discloses receiving predicted interference levels for different future time periods (Bruhn, paragraph [0015], receiving traffic status information; paragraph [0016], predicting a change in load and/or interference; paragraph [0034], traffic status information includes predictions of traffic for one or more future time intervals; paragraph [0204], RSRP).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the teachings of Bruhn to Madan to provide an improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic in the invention of Madan. The motivation to combine the references would have been to provide improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic (see Bruhn, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Bruhn discloses determining an updated loaded values that reflect updated estimated interference level for one of the different future time periods (Bruhn, paragraph [0015], receiving traffic status information; paragraph [0016], predicting a change in load and/or interference; paragraph [0034], traffic status information includes predictions of traffic for one or more future time intervals; paragraph [0204], RSRP).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the teachings of Bruhn to Madan to provide an improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic in the invention of Madan. The motivation to combine the references would have been to provide improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic (see Bruhn, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Madan discloses wherein the one or more DL RSRP thresholds include a handoff threshold for the source cell (Madan, paragraph [0033], providing for load balancing through the use of handover thresholds that can be dynamically optimized; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP measured by the UE from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0037], Signal-to-interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) can be estimated based on RSRP; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR are above a minimum SINR).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Madan discloses wherein the one or more DL RSRP thresholds is based on a relative difference between one of the loaded DL RSRP values for the source cell and another loaded DL RSRP value for a target cell (Madan, paragraph [0033], providing for load balancing through the use of handover thresholds that can be dynamically optimized; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP measured by the UE from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0037], Signal-to-interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) can be estimated based on RSRP; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR are above a minimum SINR).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Bruhn discloses wherein each of the different future time periods is between 5 minutes and 60 minutes (Bruhn, paragraph [0597], periodic every 15 minutes in a continuous stream).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the teachings of Bruhn to Madan to provide an improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic in the invention of Madan. The motivation to combine the references would have been to provide improved network resource management based on measurements and/or predictions of data traffic (see Bruhn, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Madan discloses further comprising: applying, by an access station, the one or more DL RSRP thresholds to govern a handover event for a UE device that is in the source cell (Madan, paragraph [0033], providing for load balancing through the use of handover thresholds that can be dynamically optimized; paragraph [0034], handover triggered when RSRP from source cell is less than RSRP measured by the UE from target cell plus handover threshold; paragraph [0037], Signal-to-interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) can be estimated based on RSRP; paragraph [0038], RSRP is measured and averaged over RBs; paragraph [0039], RB is a slot spanning .5 milliseconds; paragraph [0067], optimization of HO thresholds such that transmissions at a SINR are above a minimum SINR).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Madan and Bruhn, specifically Madan discloses wherein the network device includes one of: a Self-Organizing Network (SON) function; a Radio access network (RAN) Intelligent Controller (RIC); or a Central Unit (CU) (Madan, paragraph [0023], Self-Organizing Network (SON); paragraph [0024], centralized SON architecture).
Claim 11 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 1. Madan additionally discloses one or more processors (Madan, paragraph [0151]).
Claim 12 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 13 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim 14 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 16 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 6.
Claim 18 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 1. Madan additionally discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions executable by at least one processor, the computer-readable medium comprising one or more instructions (Madan, paragraph [0151]).
Claims 19 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 3.
Claims 20 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 10.
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madan et al. (US 2017/0208526) in view of Bruhn et al. (US 2024/0196272), an further in view of Yun et al. (US 2018/0192345).
Regarding claim 5,Madan in view of Bruhn does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more DL RSRP thresholds include a start measurement trigger or a stop measurement trigger for the source cell.
Yun discloses wherein the one or more DL RSRP thresholds include a start measurement trigger or a stop measurement trigger for the source cell (Yun, paragraph [0066], in an LTE network, A3 measurements are based on RSRP or RSRQ, event A3 is triggered when a neighbor cell signal becomes offset better than serving cell signal; paragraph [0067], UE will start reporting measurements to the serving cell if entering condition is true and if A3event is configured for the UE).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Yun to the combination of Madan and Bruhn to improve handover and reselection processes in LTE-based networks.
Claim 15 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 5.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Madan et al. (US 2017/0208526) in view of Bruhn et al. (US 2024/0196272), and further in view of Sharma et al. (US 2017/0295510).
Regarding claim 7, Madan in view of Bruhn does not explicitly disclose Interference over Thermal values.
Sharma discloses wherein determining the loaded DL RSRP values includes receiving multiple predicted Interference over Thermal values for the source cell for multiple time intervals (Sharma, paragraph [0002], uplink measurements such as interference per RB, Noise per RB, thermal noise power and interference power; paragraph [0003], estimate the channel; paragraph [0006], interference measure may be thermal noise power).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Sharma to the combination of Madan and Bruhn. The motivation to enhance the user data decoding and the overall system performance .
Claim 17 is rejected under substantially the same rationale as claim 7.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Madan et al. (US 20170164206) discloses calculating interference coordination parameters for each small cell radio belonging to each corresponding set, wherein the interference coordination parameters for each small cell radio belonging to each corresponding set comprises an uplink interference budget for each small cell radio; and communicating the interference coordination parameters to each small cell radio belonging to each corresponding set.
Vera Nadales et al. (US 20230066921) discloses using existing intra-frequency event A3 UE measurements in the network. Event A3 thresholds cannot be modified as UE distribution over network cells and RAN algorithm behavior will be modified, Therefore, C/I sample is received whenever C/I is lower than A3 triggering value.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN LOUIS LINDENBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-3858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM EST.
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, Un Cho can be reached at (571) 272-7919. 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.
/A.L.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights