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 .
Examiner’s Statement of Reason for Allowance
Claims 1-10, 12-13 and 21 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record teaches “generate map data representing a network-roaming layer associated with a map of the environment, the network-roaming layer associating the network access device with the location in the environment”, for example claim 16 in Agarwal et al (US 10237700 B2) or par 0037 in Wunderlich (US 20200014759 A1). However, the prior art of record fails to show the limitation of claim 1, “generate map data representing a network-roaming layer associated with a map of the environment, the network-roaming layer associating the network access device with the location in the environment for use in establishing the network connectivity at the location”.
Claims 2-10, 12-13 and 21 are allowed by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
The main reason for allowance of these claims are applicant’s remarks filed on 05/28/2026.
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record teaches “cause a machine to switch a network connection from a first network access device to a second network access device based at least on a current location of the machine within an environment and on map data representing a of the machine within the environment”, for example claim 2 in Yamasaki et al (US 20180302835 A1). However, the prior art of record fails to show the limitation of claim 19, “cause a machine to switch a network connection from a first network access device to a second network access device based at least on a current location of the machine within an environment and on map data representing a network-roaming layer associated with a map of the environment, the map data associating the second network access device with the location of the machine within the environment”.
Claim 20 is allowed by virtue of its dependency on claim 19.
The main reason for allowance of these claims are applicant’s remarks filed on 05/28/2026.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 3-10, 12, 14 and 19-20 have been amended, claim 11 has been cancelled and claim 21 has been newly added. The status of claims 1-10 and 12-21 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 14 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 § 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 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 col. 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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kappes et al (US20230328538A1) in view of Lee et al (US20250206339A1, Foreign Priority Date: Dec 20, 2023), and further in view of Lekutai (US20220029695A1).
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), Kappes’538 discloses a method (see, Fig. 1-2, FWD device connecting to cells and mobile device to generate heat map, par 0079) comprising:
obtaining map data (heat map with measurements and locations can be equated to map data, par 0102) representing a map associated with an environment (see, generates point by point heat map with measurements and location for environment, par 0099, 0102), the map data (heat map with measurements and locations can be equated to map data, par 0102) indicating one or more network access devices (RANs (BSs) for networks can be equated to network access device, par 0054) to use for network connectivity at one or more locations in the environment (see, heat map indicates strength of the connectivity of a separate network of networks through corresponding BS on certain locations, par 0054, 0102).
Kappes’538 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
determining, based at least on sensor data and the map data, a current location of an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine relative to the environment; and
causing the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine to establish a network connection with a the one or more network access devices based at least on a determination that the current location of the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine corresponds to the one or more locations.
However Lee’339 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, method of controlling autonomous vehicle, par 0076) discloses:
determining, based at least on sensor data and the map data, a current location of an autonomous or semi-autonomous machine (autonomous driving vehicle can be equated to autonomous machine, par 0020) relative to the environment (see, estimating position of autonomous driving vehicle based on HD map information and sensor information about surroundings of the vehicle, claim 10, par 0020).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Lee’339 into that of Kappes’538. The motivation would have been to accurately perceive and navigate their surroundings (par 0053).
The combination of Kappes’538 and Lee’339 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
causing the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine to establish a network connection with a the one or more network access devices based at least on a determination that the current location of the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine corresponds to the one or more locations.
However Lekutai’695 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, mitigating radio signal interference caused by UAVs that use a wireless carrier network, par 0014) discloses: causing the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine (UAVs perform limited autonomous flight can be equated to semi-autonomous machine, par 0001) to establish a network connection with a the one or more network access devices (Fig. 5, switching uplink communication of UAV between UAV and base station, par 0047) based at least on a determination that the current location of the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine corresponds to the one or more locations (see, Fig. 5, switching uplink communication of UAV between UAV and base station based on location of UAV according to the determined distance to base station and determined relationship of position of UAV with antenna height threshold and band switch height threshold, par 0047-0051. Noted, location of NAV for determined distance and determined relationship of position of UAV with antenna height threshold and band switch height threshold can be equated to current location of the autonomous or semi-autonomous machine corresponds to the one or more locations).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Lekutai’695 into that of Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339. The motivation would have been to mitigate radio interference to wireless carrier network by the radio signals of UAVs (par 0011).
Regarding claim 15 (Original), Kappes’538 discloses the method of claim 14 (see, Fig. 1-2, FWD device connecting to cells and mobile device to generate heat map, par 0079), further comprising:
determining, based at least on second sensor (GPS/compass can be equated to sensor, par 0073) data, a second location of the machine (location of FWA device can be equated to location of a machine, par 0073) relative to the environment represented in the map data (see, FWA device determines each location of locations using resident navigational functionality (GPS and compass) presented on map with associated predicted/estimated performance ratings for surrounding environment, par 0073, 0079. Noted, measurements are taken at various points when FWA device moves around, par 0073); and
causing the machine to establish a second network connection with a second network access device of the one or more network access devices (RAN (BS) for networks can be equated to network access device of the one or more network access devices, par 0054) based at least on the map data associating the second network access device with the second location (see, Fig. 5, FWA device selects better connection (and thus corresponding BS) from networks/connections (BSs) for connectivity based on heat map indicating optimal positioning of FWA device relative to gNB by measurement of connection strength of BS and corresponding location when FWA device moves around different locations, par 0073, 0103).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kappes’538 in view of Lee’339, and further in view of Lekutai’695 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Schmidt et al (US20120201143A1).
Regarding claim 16 (Original), Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses the method of claim 14 (see, Fig. 1-2, FWD device connecting to cells and mobile device to generate heat map, par 0079), wherein.
The combination of Kappes’538, Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
the map data further indicates a second network access device of the one or more network access devices to use as a backup to the network access device at the location; and
the method further comprises causing the machine to establish a second network connection with the second network access device based at least on a determination that a network performance score associated with the network access device is below a threshold.
However Schmidt’143 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1-2, managing network connections for the electronic device when electronic device communicates with network access management system (as server) in wireless communication system, par 0039, 0057) discloses:
the map data further indicates a second network access device of the one or more network access devices (base station of alternative network can be equated to second network access device, par 0041, 0044) to use as a backup to the network access device (base station of primary network can be equated to network access device, par 0041) at the location (see, storing Information about additional alternative networks (with corresponding BS) in another network information database to indicate potentially available alternative networks at locations to replace primary network (with corresponding BS), par 0038, 0041, 0044); and
the method further comprises causing the machine to establish a second network connection with the second network access device (AP of alternative network can be equated to network access device, par 0040) based at least on a determination that a network performance score (if performance by ranking is found to be below a predetermined threshold can be equated to a determination that a network performance score associated with the network access device is below a threshold, par 0066-0067) associated with the network access device is below a threshold (see, Fig. 2, connects to alternate network after returning to proximity check state if performance by ranking is found to be below a predetermined threshold, par 0066-0067).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Schmidt’143 into that of Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695. The motivation would have been to efficiently provide network access while moderating power consumption by the electronic device (par 0005).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kappes’538 in view of Lee’339, and further in view of Lekutai’695 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Schmidt’143 and Scherzer et al (US20120196644A1).
Regarding claim 17 (Original), Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses the method of claim 14 (see, Fig. 1-2, FWD device connecting to cells and mobile device to generate heat map, par 0079), further comprising.
The combination of Kappes’538, Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
causing the machine to establish a second network connection with a second network access device based at least on a determination that a network performance score associated with the network access device is below a threshold; and
causing an update to the map data to associate the second network access device with the location.
However Schmidt’143 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1-2, managing network connections for the electronic device when electronic device communicates with network access management system (as server) in wireless communication system, par 0039, 0057) discloses:
causing the machine to establish a second network connection with the second network access device (AP of alternative network can be equated to network access device, par 0040) based at least on a determination that a network performance score (if performance by ranking is found to be below a predetermined threshold can be equated to a determination that a network performance score associated with the network access device is below a threshold, par 0066-0067) associated with the network access device is below a threshold (see, Fig. 2, connects to alternate network after returning to proximity check state if performance by ranking is found to be below a predetermined threshold, par 0066-0067).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Schmidt’143 into that of Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695. The motivation would have been to efficiently provide network access while moderating power consumption by the electronic device (par 0005).
The combination of Kappes’538, Lee’339, Lekutai’695 and Schmidt’143 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: causing an update to the map data to associate the second network access device with the location.
However Scherzer’644 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 3, wireless end user terminals connected to wireless networks in system with enhanced Access Network Discovery and Selection Function, par 0083) discloses:
causing an update to the map data (quality scores for wireless networks or wireless access points for specific location can be equated to map data, par 0084) to associate the second network access device with the location (see, quality score for each wireless access point of wireless access points on each location in the server’s database or terminal’s cache can be updated for terminal to select the best network, par 0082).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the system as taught by Scherzer’644 into that of Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339, Lekutai’695 and Schmidt’143. The motivation would have been to make better network selection decisions (par 0075).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kappes’538 in view of Lee’339, and further in view of Lekutai’695 as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Silverstein et al (US20250056243A1, Priority Date: Aug 10, 2023).
Regarding claim 18 (Original), Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses the method of claim 14 (see, Fig. 1-2, FWD device connecting to cells and mobile device to generate heat map, par 0079), further comprising.
The combination of Kappes’538, Lee’339 and Lekutai’695 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the map data comprises a base map portion representing the environment and a network portion indicating the one or more network access devices to use for the network connectivity at the one or more locations, the network portion including one or more bounding areas corresponding to the one or more locations, the one or more bounding areas including a bounding area corresponding to the location in the environment, the bounding area indicating to use the network access device for the network connectivity while the machine is located within the bounding area.
However Silverstein’243 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1C, create or refine a network map that maps a plurality of portions of geographic area respectively to signal strength of LAN based on the network map inputs, par 0032) discloses:
wherein the map data comprises a base map portion representing the environment (see, UAV takes mapping images of the ground underneath to associate a physical area representation with signal strength, par 0048) and a network portion indicating the one or more network access devices (BSs or APs can be equated to one or more network access devices, par 0002, 0005) to use for the network connectivity at the one or more locations (note, network of networks (and thus corresponding BSs) with sufficient signal in specific zone (indicated by excellent coverage zone, good coverage zone, fair coverage zone, no-coverage zone) provides steady connections, par 0023, 0031), the network portion including one or more bounding areas (coverage zones can be equated to network portion including one or more bounding areas, par 0031) corresponding to the one or more locations (see, UAV captures RSSI delta relative to its geographic/spatial location and velocity to map variations in network range bounds and metrics correlated to zones, par 0031, 0048. Noted, zones including excellent coverage zone, good coverage zone, fair coverage zone, no-coverage zone, par 0031), the one or more bounding areas including a bounding area corresponding to the location in the environment (see, zones including excellent coverage zone, good coverage zone, fair coverage zone, no-coverage zone determined according to measured RSSI delta relative to its geographic/spatial location and velocity to map variations in network range bounds, par 0031, 0048), the bounding area indicating to use the network access device for the network connectivity while the machine is located within the bounding area (see, LAN sufficient signal in specific zone (indicated by excellent coverage zone, good coverage zone, fair coverage zone, no-coverage zone) for steady connections, par 0031).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the method as taught by Silverstein’243 into that of Kappes’538 modified by Lee’339 and Lekutai’695. The motivation would have been to create or refine a network map that maps a plurality of portions of the first geographic area respectively to signal strength of the first LAN based on the network map inputs (par 0006).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-2844. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, KWANG YAO can be reached on (571)272-3182. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/XUAN LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights