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 Amendment
The amendments filed on April, 28, 2026 has been fully considered and entered into the record. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 13-15, 17, 18, and 20 have been amended. Claim 11 has been cancelled. Claim 21 is new. Claims 1-10, and 12-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
(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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 USC § 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Lai et al. (US 20180049115 A1, hereinafter “Lai”)
Regarding Claim 13, Lai teaches, a system comprising an access point, the access point having one or more processors configured to cause a plurality of operations, “In examples of the disclosure, the positioning server may select a positioning AP by executing machine executable instructions” [0031]
receiving location information corresponding to each of a plurality of additional access points, “The coordinates of each of the APs deployed in the WLAN are known on the positioning server. For example, after the APs are deployed, the coordinates of each of the APs may be stored onto the positioning server.” [0029]
determining a polygon-shaped geographical region based on the location information corresponding to each of the plurality of additional access points, the polygon-shaped geographical region being determined such that each of the plurality of additional access points is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “The term “enclose” means that, when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024], and “a line segment set including a plurality of line segments may be acquired, wherein each of the line segments is formed by connecting every two APs in an initial AP set” [0033], and further “line segments in each line segment subset may be connected to form a N-polygon” [0034]. As shown in FIG. 6, 7, and 8 of Lai, access points AP1, AP2, AP3, and AP4 are positioned at the vertices of the polygon – that is, each of the plurality of access points is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region – with terminal 51 located inside.
wherein the access point is located within the polygon-shaped geographical region, “when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024]
defining a location, of the access point, as a function of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “the positioning server may calculate the position of the terminal to be positioned according to the values of the parameters and the coordinates of each of the positioning Aps” [0030]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 12, 14-15, 17-21 are rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20180049115 A1, hereinafter “Lai”), and further in view of Ansley et al. (US 20220329979 A1, hereinafter “Ansley”)
Regarding Claim 1, Lai teaches, one or more non-transitory media having instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, cause performance of a plurality of operations, the operations comprising: “If the functions in the device or method are implemented in software functional units and sold or used as an integrated product, these functions may be stored into a machine readable storage medium. Based on such understanding, the substantial part of the technical solution according to the disclosure, which make contributions to the prior art, or other part may be embodied in a software product. The software product may be stored into a storage medium, comprising instructions to cause a computer device (personal computer (PC), server or network device) to execute part or all of blocks in the method” [0071], and further “In examples of the disclosure, the positioning server may select a positioning AP by executing machine executable instructions” [0031]
receiving location information corresponding to each of a plurality of GPS-enabled access points, “The coordinates of each of the APs deployed in the WLAN are known on the positioning server. For example, after the APs are deployed, the coordinates of each of the APs may be stored onto the positioning server” [0029], and “the positioning monitor software may load the coordinates of Aps” [0038]
determining a polygon-shaped geographical region based on the location information corresponding to each of the plurality of GPS-enabled access points , the polygon-shaped geographical region being determined such that each of the plurality of GPS-enabled access points is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “The term “enclose” means that, when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024], and “a line segment set including a plurality of line segments may be acquired, wherein each of the line segments is formed by connecting every two APs in an initial AP set” [0033], and further “line segments in each line segment subset may be connected to form a N-polygon” [0034]. As shown in FIG. 6, 7, and 8 of Lai, access points AP1, AP2, AP3, and AP4 are positioned at the vertices of the polygon – that is, each of the plurality of access points is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region – with terminal 51 located inside.
wherein a target device is located within the polygon-shaped geographical region, “when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024], and further “each of the at least one candidate AP set may include a preset number of APs enclosing a terminal to be positioned.” [0019]
defining a location, of the target device, as a function of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “the positioning server may calculate the position of the terminal to be positioned according to the values of the parameters and the coordinates of each of the positioning Aps” [0030]. The terminal’s location is defined as a function of the coordinates of the Aps forming the polygon-shaped geographical region, which constitutes defining a location of the target devices as a function of the polygon-shaped geographical region.
However, Lai does not explicitly teach:
the plurality of access points are GPS-enable access points, wherein the location information corresponds to GPS-derived coordinates of the access point; and
transmitting the location to a configuration server
In the same field of endeavor, Ansley disclose that access points are GPS-enabled and transmitting location to a configuration server, “A device (e.g., AP 105) may automatically determine a geographic location at which the device is currently positioned and/or a location at which the device has been installed. For example, GPS, cellular triangulation, or other systems may be utilized to determine a location of the device” [0035], and further “In embodiments, the device may include an internal GPS through which the device may determine its current location.”, and “The device (e.g., AP 105) may be provided location information through a provisioning server or configuration server” [0041]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lai by using GPS-enabled access points as the location-providing entities, as taught by Ansley, wherein each access point includes an internal GPS through which the access point determines and provides its own location coordinates – thereby satisfying the “GPS-enabled access points” – and by further transmitting the determined target device location to a configuration server as taught by Ansley. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Ansley establishes that GPS-enabled access point that self-report their location coordinates were a known and conventional design choice in the wireless networking field, and using GPS-enabled access points as coordinate sources provide more reliable and self-sufficient location reference points than access points with externally stored coordinate, as the GPS-enabled Aps can autonomously determine and report their own positions.
Regarding Claim 2, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 2 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Lai further teaches, wherein defining the location, of the target device, as a function of the polygon-shaped geographical region comprises: defining the location, of the target device, as the polygon- shaped geographical region, “suppose that the positioning server divides the 2-dimensional positioning plane into grids, such as grids 91, 92, 93 and 94. Each of the grids may represent a preset region on which a terminal may locate” [0052]
Regarding Claim 3, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 3 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Lai further teaches, wherein the polygon-shaped geographical region is computed such that each of the plurality of GPS-enabled access points is devices are located at respective vertices of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “at least one line segment subset may be selected from the line segment set, wherein line segments in each line segment subset may be connected to form a N-polygon, and the N is equal to a preset number defined for positioning APs.” [0034]. As further shown in FIGS. 6-8 of Lai, AP1, AP2, AP3, and AP4 form the N-polygon surrounding terminal 51, such that the APs are positioned along the perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region and the terminal is located within the polygon.
Regarding Claim 5, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 5 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving, from the configuration server, configuration data based on the location; and configuring the target device based on the configuration data.
Ansley teaches, receiving, from the configuration server, configuration data based on the location; and configuring the target device based on the configuration data, “The baseline location may be output to a database (e.g., database of an AFC system 115 of FIG. 1) at 410. At 415, the AFC system may determine whether the baseline location of the device is within one or more exclusion zones” [0065], and further at FIG. 4, step 430, “Initiate operating the device at the available frequencies according to the operational requirements.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lai with Ansley to receive configuration data from a configuration server based on the determined location and configure the target device based on that configuration data, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable the target device to operate according to location-based operational requirements.
Regarding Claim 6, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 6 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the target device is an additional access point.
Ansley teaches, the target device is an additional access point, “ operation of a device (e.g., an access device such as an access point (AP) 105 and/or one or more stations 110 associated with the AP 105) may be dependent upon communications with an AFC system 115” [0034], and further “A device (e.g., AP 105) may automatically determine a geographic location at which the device is currently positioned and/or a location at which the device has been installed.” [0035]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lai with Ansley such that the target device is an additional access point, as taught by Ansley, in order to determine the location of an access point based on surrounding GPS-enabled access points for network configuration and management purposes.
Regarding Claim 7, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 7 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Lai further teaches, receiving, by the target device, additional location information corresponding to a particular GPS-enabled access point device that is not included in the plurality of GPS- enabled access points devices, the additional location information comprising (a) a particular location of the particular GPS-enabled access point device and (b) an accuracy level corresponding to the particular location, “some overlong line segments may be excluded from the line segment set illustrated in FIG. 5, so as to select the APs as close to the terminal 51 as possible. For example, a length threshold for line segment selection may be set.” [0040]
determining whether the accuracy level meets an accuracy level threshold, “If the length of a line segment is equal to or greater than the length threshold, it may be removed from the line segment set.” [0041]
and responsive to determining that the accuracy level does not meet the accuracy level threshold, refraining from using the particular location of the particular GPS-enabled access point device to compute the polygon-shaped geographical region, “the length of the line segment a3 formed by connecting AP 6 and AP 7 exceeds the length threshold and thus is removed from the line segment set.” [0041]
Regarding Claim 8, Lai teaches, a method, comprising: “If the functions in the device or method are implemented in software functional units and sold or used as an integrated product, these functions may be stored into a machine readable storage medium. Based on such understanding, the substantial part of the technical solution according to the disclosure, which make contributions to the prior art, or other part may be embodied in a software product. The software product may be stored into a storage medium, comprising instructions to cause a computer device (personal computer (PC), server or network device) to execute part or all of blocks in the method” [0071]
receiving location information corresponding to each of a plurality of GPS-enabled devices, “The coordinates of each of the APs deployed in the WLAN are known on the positioning server. For example, after the APs are deployed, the coordinates of each of the APs may be stored onto the positioning server.” [0029]
determining a polygon-shaped geographical region based on the location information corresponding to each of the plurality of GPS-enabled devices, the polygon-shaped geographical region being determined such that each of the plurality of GPS-enabled devices is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “The term “enclose” means that, when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024], and “a line segment set including a plurality of line segments may be acquired, wherein each of the line segments is formed by connecting every two APs in an initial AP set” [0033], and further “line segments in each line segment subset may be connected to form a N-polygon” [0034]. As shown in FIG. 6, 7, and 8 of Lai, access points AP1, AP2, AP3, and AP4 are positioned at the vertices of the polygon – that is, each of the plurality of access points is located along a perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region – with terminal 51 located inside.
wherein a target device is located within the polygon-shaped geographical region, “when APs in an AP set are sequentially connected to form a polygon, the terminal to be positioned is located within the polygon.” [0024]
defining a location, of the target device, as a function of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “the positioning server may calculate the position of the terminal to be positioned according to the values of the parameters and the coordinates of each of the positioning Aps” [0030].
However, Lai does not explicitly teach that the GPS-enabled devices are GPS-enabled through an internal GPS, transmitting the location to a configuration server, receiving configuration data from the configuration server based on the location, configuring the target device based on the configuration data, that the target device includes an access point, and that the configuration data comprises a radio transmit power level range or frequencies approved by the configuration server.
In the same field of endeavor, Ansley teaches, transmitting the location to a configuration server, “The device (e.g., AP 105) may be provided location information through a provisioning server or configuration server. “ [0041]
receiving, from the configuration server, configuration data based on the location, “If the baseline location of the device is within one or more exclusion zones, the AFC system may output to the device, available frequencies and one or more other operational requirements associated with the one or more exclusion zones at 420” [0065]
configuring the target device based on the configuration data, as shown in FIG. 4, step 430 “Initiate operating the device at the available frequencies according to the operational requirements”
wherein the target device includes an access point, “operation of a device (e.g., an access device such as an access point (AP) 105 and/or one or more stations 110 associated with the AP 105) may be dependent upon communications with an AFC system 115.” [0034]
wherein the configuration data comprises one or more items selected from a group comprising (a) a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server for use by the access point, (b) one or more frequencies approved by the configuration server for use by the target device, “The AFC database may identify one or more frequencies available to the respective device (e.g., AP 105), wherein the available frequencies are based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone. Further, the database may identify one or more operating requirements, such as transmit power level, based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone.” [0051]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lai with Ansley to use GPS-enabled access points as the location-providing entities, transmit the determined target device location to a configuration server, receive configuration data comprising approved frequencies and transmit power levels based on that location, and configure the target device accordingly, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable location-based regulatory compliance and network configuration of the target access point device.
Regarding Claim 9, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitation of claim 9 as recited above in the rejection of claim 8. In addition, Lai further teaches, defining the location, of the target device, as the polygon- shaped geographical region, “suppose that the positioning server divides the 2-dimensional positioning plane into grids, such as grids 91, 92, 93 and 94. Each of the grids may represent a preset region on which a terminal may locate” [0052]
the polygon-shaped geographical region is computed such that each of the plurality of GPS-enabled devices are located at respective vertices of the polygon-shaped geographical region, “at least one line segment subset may be selected from the line segment set, wherein line segments in each line segment subset may be connected to form a N-polygon, and the N is equal to a preset number defined for positioning APs.” [0034]. As further shown in FIGS. 6-8 of Lai, AP1, AP2, AP3, and AP4 form the N-polygon surrounding terminal 51, such that the APs are positioned along the perimeter of the polygon-shaped geographical region and the terminal is located within the polygon.
Regarding Claim 12, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 12 as recited above in the rejection of claim 8. In addition, Lai further teaches, receiving, by the target device, additional location information corresponding to a particular GPS-enabled device that is not included in the plurality of GPS-enabled devices, the additional location information comprising (a) a particular location of the particular GPS-enabled device and (b) an accuracy level corresponding to the particular location, “some overlong line segments may be excluded from the line segment set illustrated in FIG. 5, so as to select the APs as close to the terminal 51 as possible. For example, a length threshold for line segment selection may be set” [0040]
determining whether the accuracy level meets an accuracy level threshold, “If the length of a line segment is equal to or greater than the length threshold, it may be removed from the line segment set.” [0041]
responsive to determining that the accuracy level does not meet the accuracy level threshold, refraining from using the particular location of the particular GPS-enabled device to compute the polygon-shaped geographical region, “the length of the line segment a3 formed by connecting AP 6 and AP 7 exceeds the length threshold and thus is removed from the line segment set.” [0041]
Regarding Claim 14, Lai discloses the limitations of claim14 as recited above in the rejection of claim 13. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, perform a first transmission of the location to a configuration server, wherein the location is identified in the first transmission as a location of the access point; receive, from the configuration server, first configuration data that is based on the first transmission and that includes one or more frequencies as first operation frequencies approved for use by the access point during a first interval of time; and configure the access point based on the first configuration data.
In the same field of endeavor, Ansley teaches, perform a first transmission of the location to a configuration server, wherein the location is identified in the first transmission as a location of the access point, “The device (e.g., AP 105) may be provided location information through a provisioning server or configuration server.” [0041]
receive, from the configuration server, first configuration data that is based on the first transmission and that includes one or more frequencies as first operation frequencies approved for use by the access point during a first interval of time, “The AFC database may identify one or more frequencies available to the respective device (e.g., AP 105), wherein the available frequencies are based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone. Further, the database may identify one or more operating requirements, such as transmit power level, based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone.” [0051]
configure the access point based on the first configuration data, as shown in FIG. 4, step 430 “Initiate operating the device at the available frequencies according to the operational requirements”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lai with Ansley to transmit the determined access point location to a configuration server, receive approved operating frequencies based on that location and configure the access point accordingly, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable location-based regulatory compliance and frequency coordination for the access point.
Regarding Claim 15, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 15 as recited above in the rejection of claim 14. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the first configuration data comprises a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server for use by at least the access point.
Ansley teaches, the first configuration data comprises a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server for use by at least the access point, “The AFC database may identify one or more frequencies available to the respective device (e.g., AP 105), wherein the available frequencies are based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone. Further, the database may identify one or more operating requirements, such as transmit power level, based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone.” [0051]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley to include a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server as part of the configuration data, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable location-based regulatory compliance and power level coordination for the access point.
Regarding Claim 17, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 17 as recited above in the rejection of claim 14. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, an additional access point configured to: perform a second transmission of the location to the configuration server, wherein the location is identified in the second transmission as a location of the additional access point; receive, from the configuration server, second configuration data that is based on the second transmission and that includes one or more frequencies as second operation frequencies approved for use by the additional access point during a second interval of time; and configure the additional access point based on the second configuration data.
Ansley teaches, perform a second transmission of the location to the configuration server, wherein the location is identified in the second transmission as a location of the additional access point, “each device (e.g., APs 105) may also register devices that are associated with the device (e.g., STAs (stations) 110, clients, etc.). Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device)” [0034]
receive, from the configuration server, second configuration data that is based on the second transmission and that includes one or more frequencies as second operation frequencies approved for use by the additional access point during a second interval of time, “The AFC database may identify one or more frequencies available to the respective device (e.g., AP 105), wherein the available frequencies are based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone. Further, the database may identify one or more operating requirements, such as transmit power level, based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone” [0051]
configure the additional access point based on the second configuration data, as shown in FIG. 4, step 430 “Initiate operating the device at the available frequencies according to the operational requirements”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley to include an additional access point that transmits its location to the configuration server, receives approved operating frequencies based on that location, and configure itself accordingly, as taught by Ansley, since Ansley explicitly teaches that each of multiple access points may independently register with and receive configuration data from the configuration server based on their respective locations, representing a routine and predictable application of the same location-based configuration process to each access point in the network.
Regarding Claim 18, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 18 as recited above in the rejection of claim 17. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the second configuration data comprises a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server for use by the additional access point.
Ansley teaches, the second configuration data comprises a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server for use by the additional access point, “The AFC database may identify one or more frequencies available to the respective device (e.g., AP 105), wherein the available frequencies are based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone. Further, the database may identify one or more operating requirements, such as transmit power level, based upon the determination of whether the respective device is located within an exclusion zone.” [0051]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley to include a radio transmit power level range approved by the configuration server as part of the second configuration data for the additional access point, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable location-based regulatory compliance and power level coordination for the additional access point.
Regarding Claim 19, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 19 as recited above in the rejection of claim 17. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the first interval of time and the second interval of time at least partially overlap.
Ansley teaches, the first interval of time and the second interval of time at least partially overlap, “If an AP is providing high reliability services, the AP may register with more than one AFC and retain records for the at least two different AFC responses providing channel availability and power levels.” [0053] and “The AP may choose to align its heartbeat messages to maximize its holdover operation time should it lose communication with all of its AFCs. For example, with one AP communicating with 2 AFCs, the AP may choose to space the heartbeat messages 12 hours apart, so that if the AP loses all communications with both AFCs, the most recent heartbeat message will be at most 12 hours old.” [0054]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley such that the first interval of time and the second interval of time at least partially overlaps, as taught by Ansley, in order to ensure continuous and reliable network operation by maintaining overlapping approval intervals for multiple access points.
Regarding Claim 20, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 20 as recited above in the rejection of claim 13. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein: the access point is configured to indicate to a configuration server that the access point is located within the polygon- shaped geographical region, and the system comprises an additional access point configured to receive GPS data defining the polygon-shaped geographical region and to indicate to the configuration server that the second access point is located within the polygon- shaped geographical region.
Ansley teaches, the access point is configured to indicate to a configuration server that the access point is located within the polygon- shaped geographical region, “Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device)” [0034]
the system comprises an additional access point configured to receive GPS data defining the polygon-shaped geographical region and to indicate to the configuration server that the second access point is located within the polygon- shaped geographical region, “In embodiments, the device may include an internal GPS through which the device may determine its current location” [0036], and further “each device (e.g., APs 105) may also register devices that are associated with the device (e.g., STAs (stations) 110, clients, etc.). Each device may query the database with location information (e.g., location information associated with a current location of the device)” [0034]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley such that the access point indicates to a configuration server that it is located within the polygon-shaped geographical region, and an additional access point receives GPS data defining the polygon-shaped geographical region and similarly indicates its location to the configuration server, as taught by Ansley, in order to enable location-based network management and regulatory compliance for multiple access points.
Regarding Claim 21, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 21 as recited above in the rejection of claim 8. However, Lai does not explicitly teach, wherein the plurality of GPS-enabled devices are a plurality of additional access points.
Ansley teaches, the plurality of GPS-enabled devices are a plurality of additional access points, “operation of a device (e.g., an access device such as an access point (AP) 105 and/or one or more stations 110 associated with the AP 105) may be dependent upon communications with an AFC system 115.” [0034], and further “In embodiments, the device may include an internal GPS through which the device may determine its current location.” [0036]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley such that the plurality of GPS-enabled devices are a plurality of additional access points having internal GPS receivers, as taught by Ansley, in order to use fixed wireless network infrastructure access points as the GPS-enabled location-providing entities defining the polygon-shaped geographical region.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20180049115 A1, hereinafter “Lai”), in view of Ansley et al. (US 20220329979 A1, hereinafter “Ansley”), and further in view of Zehler (US 8467990 B2, hereinafter “Zehler”) and Bao et al. (US 9426622 B2, hereinafter “Bao”)
Regarding Claim 4, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 4 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Lai and Ansley do not explicitly teach that the polygon-shaped geographical region corresponds to a footprint of a building floor that includes the target device, the plurality of GPS-enabled access points are disposed along a perimeter of the building floor.
In the same field of endeavor, Zehler teaches the building floor footprint and perimeter limitations, the polygon-shaped geographical region corresponds to a footprint of a building floor that includes the target device, “a blueprint drawing of a floor of the facility where the device is deployed could be used as a site map.” [Col. 3, lines 8-9], and further “a latitude and longitude grid 24 can be calculated covering the site map based on the determined coordinates of the various reference points of the building (e.g. the corners)” [Col. 3, lines 32-34]
the plurality of GSP-enabled access points are disposed along a perimeter of the building floor, “the GPS coordinates of the corners 16 a, 16 b, 16 c and 16 d (or other reference points) of the facility are determined. This can be done either directly by using a GPS enabled device and physically obtaining the GPS coordinates of one or more reference points of the building 10.” [Col. 3, lines 22-26]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lai and Ansley with Zehler to implement the polygon-shaped geographical region as a building floor footprint defined by GPS coordinates of building reference points, with GPS-enabled access points disposed along the building floor perimeter, since Lai, Ansley, and Zehler are all directed to positioning devices within a building environment using geographic reference points, and Zehler establishes that using GPS coordinates of building floor corners to define a building floor footprint was known technique for determining device location within a facility.
However, the combination of Lai, Ansley, and Zehler does not explicitly teach receiving broadcast messages or unicast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled access points each comprising at least a portion of the location information.
In the same field of endeavor, Bao teaches, receiving broadcast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled access points, each of the broadcast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information, “server device 250 may receive an indication that one or more intermediate devices are broadcasting a location tag” [Col. 6, lines 9-11], and “The location tag may include a device identifier that identifies the device broadcasting the location tag. Additionally, or alternatively the location tag may include an indication that the device possesses device location information.” [Col. 6, lines 13-17], and further teaches that anchor device 210 may include an access point “anchor device 210 may include a mobile phone (e.g., a Smart phone), a base station, an access point” [Col. 3, lines 22-23]
receiving unicast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled access points responsive to the target device transmitting a broadcast message for the location information, each of the unicast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information, “target device 230 may receive information using a “pull” approach, without server device 250 acting as a coordinator. A pull approach may include target device 230 extracting, requesting, and/or retrieving information from the one or more intermediate devices 220, the two or fewer anchor devices 210, and/or server device 250.” [Col. 9, lines 53-59]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai, Ansley, and Zehler with Bao’s broadcast and pull-based location messaging to enable the target device to obtain GPS-enabled access point location information using known wireless communication techniques, since Bao establishes that broadcasting location tags and responding to device pull requests were known techniques for communicating location information between devices.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20180049115 A1, hereinafter “Lai”), in view of Ansley et al. (US 20220329979 A1, hereinafter “Ansley”), and further in view of Bao et al. (US 9426622 B2, hereinafter “Bao”)
Regarding Claim 10, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 10 as recited above in the rejection of claim 8. However, Lai and Ansley do not explicitly teach, wherein receiving the location information comprises receiving one or both of: broadcast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled devices, each of the broadcast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information; and
unicast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled devices responsive to the target device transmitting a broadcast message for the location information, each of the unicast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information.
In the same field of endeavor, Bao teaches, receiving broadcast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled devices, each of the broadcast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information, “server device 250 may receive an indication that one or more intermediate devices are broadcasting a location tag” [Col. 6, lines 9-11], and “The location tag may include a device identifier that identifies the device broadcasting the location tag. Additionally, or alternatively the location tag may include an indication that the device possesses device location information.” [Col. 6, lines 13-17]
receiving unicast messages from the plurality of GPS-enabled devices responsive to the target device transmitting a broadcast message for the location information, each of the unicast messages comprising at least a portion of the location information, “target device 230 may receive information using a “pull” approach, without server device 250 acting as a coordinator. A pull approach may include target device 230 extracting, requesting, and/or retrieving information from the one or more intermediate devices 220, the two or fewer anchor devices 210, and/or server device 250.” [Col. 9, lines 53-59]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley to receive location information from GPS-enabled devices via broadcast messages and unicast messages responsive to a target device request as taught by Bao, in order to enable efficient location information exchange between devices using known broadcast and pull-based communication techniques.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Lai et al. (US 20180049115 A1, hereinafter “Lai”), in view of Ansley et al. (US 20220329979 A1, hereinafter “Ansley”), and further in view of Feinstein et al. (US 20110162033 A1, hereinafter “Feinstein”)
Regarding Claim 16, Lai and Ansley disclose the limitations of claim 16 as recited above in the rejection of claim 14. However, Lai and Ansley do not explicitly teach, wherein the first configuration data comprises one or both of (a) a security policy associated with a building floor that is included within the polygon-shaped geographical region and (b) an access policy associated with the building floor.
In the same field of endeavor, Feinstein teaches, a security policy associated with a building floor that is included within the polygon-shaped geographical region, “The invention recognizes that a network generally has an associated geographical location. For example, one wireless network may be available on one floor of an office building and another wireless network may be available on another floor of the same office building” [0024], and “A security policy is a rule or specification for performing a configuration, sending an instruction, sending a message, or a combination thereof, for enforcing a security measure in a data processing system. Furthermore, a security policy's rule or specification for performing an action is dependent upon a location of the data processing system and on information describing one or more wireless networks present at that location.”, and further “Server 106 may include policies 107. Policies 107 may be a policy repository or a policy server—a server application for serving policies. A policy in policies 107 may be a security policy.” [0045]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the combination of Lai and Ansley to include a security policy associated with a building floor as part of the first configuration data sent from the configuration server to the access point, as taught by Feinstein, in order to enable location-based security enforcement at the building floor level for wireless network access points.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Cote et al. (US 20220187472 A1) Recording system and apparatus including user-defined polygon geofencing, discloses a system and apparatus for recording and archiving diverse communications over radio transmissions. The system and apparatus enables unattended airports within a geofenced area to generate a useful archive of all radio communications made by Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) equipped aircraft and ground personnel. A combination of hardware and software components are provided to record and store radio transmissions in computer files. Recording archiving and reporting of received and stored data includes aircraft identification, location and heading and other data, including time-based data within one or more user-defined polygons.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG PHUOC LE whose telephone number is (571)272-3659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:30 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
SANG PHUOC. LE
Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/SANG PHUOC LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights