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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7, 9, 16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (“Lin”) (US 20210376919 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches:
A non-transitory computer readable media having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by one or more computer processing components, cause the one or more computer processing components to perform a method for dynamic spectrum management and interference mitigation in mobile communications [¶0033, ¶0051, processors and memory for spectrum management], the method comprising:
providing downlink coverage to a first geographical area via a plurality of extraterrestrial base stations [Figure 3, 6, shows multiple areas, collectively considered the “first geographical area” serviced by satellites 1-3];
generating a traffic table for the first geographical area using data collected by the plurality of extraterrestrial base stations, wherein the traffic table reflects an intensity and distribution of communication traffic across the first geographical area [Figure 3 shows representation of density of users across the areas and the communication load corresponding to intensity and distribution of traffic, this information known to the system as in ¶0113, and see ¶0117 Figure 6, the map based on information in table 1] identifying a second geographical area within the first geographical area, based on the traffic heatmap, where the communication traffic exceeds a predetermined threshold [¶0117, traffic within area A densely populated, load is heavy, see ¶0122 traffic of a link for a sub-area reaches a threshold, further Figure 4A-4B, traffic exceeds threshold, ¶0090]; and causing one or more extraterrestrial base stations, initially scheduled to provide downlink coverage to the second geographical area, to adjust signal parameters to the second geographical area [¶0117 adjust downlink signal parameters for area serviced by satellite 1, e.g. satellite 2 may cover portion of downlink area of satellite 1].
Lin teaches a table, table 1, with density indications for each region, and shows a map of the regions, but does not expressly teach heatmaps. Gupta teaches generating a traffic heatmap for the first geographical area, wherein the traffic heatmap reflects an intensity and distribution of communication traffic across the first geographical area [¶0015, “The systems and methods described herein may use the location data of remote users to build a dynamic heatmap indicating the network locations of the remote users across the SD-WAN. Using the heatmap, if the system identifies a network location having a concentration of remote users and/or traffic that rises above a pre-determined threshold” thus intensity and distribution in heatmap]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a heat map representing density of traffic in areas. Lin clearly shows in [0117 table 1 to possess this information to make downlink adjustments and it would have been obvious to generate a heatmap as in Gupta to identify locations with above-threshold concentrations of users and adjust access gateways ¶0015.
Regarding claim 2, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1 wherein the generation of the traffic heatmap includes real-time analysis of communication traffic [Gupta, ¶0014-15, location data used to build heatmap, corresponding to “real-time analysis” see rationale for combination as in claim 1].
Regarding claim 4, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1, further comprising communicating adjustments in downlink coverage to ground-based network control centers for centralized traffic management [Lin ¶0106 after adjustment, based on downlink adjustment not being able to satisfy communication requirement, AMF triggered by a message to allocate another satellite beam to assist based on adjustments in downlink coverage, thus considered communicated adjustments in downlink coverage].
Regarding claim 7, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1 further comprising rerouting data traffic to underutilized extraterrestrial base stations [Lin ¶0117 traffic rerouted via beam of underutilized satellite 2 Figure 6 over less concentrated sub-area ”A satellite beam of a satellite base station 401 (Sat. #2) covers the area B, the area B is a sparsely populated area, and communication load of the satellite base station 401 (Sat. #2) is light. In addition, the satellite base station 401 (Sat. #2) is close to the satellite base station 401 (Sat. #1), and the beam of the satellite base station 401 (Sat. #2) may cover a part or all of the area A”].
Regarding claim 9, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1 wherein the extraterrestrial base stations comprise radio frequency detectors for monitoring uplink and downlink traffic [Lin ¶0070 satellites with air interfaces for receiving traffic from terminal (monitoring uplink) and sending downlink to ground station (monitor downlink)].
Regarding claim 16, Lin teaches:
A method for dynamic spectrum management and interference mitigation in mobile communications, the method comprising:
monitoring network traffic across different geographic areas using a constellation of extraterrestrial base stations [Figure 3, 6, shows multiple areas, collectively considered the “first geographical area” serviced by satellites 1-3, ¶0070 receive and send traffic thus corresponding to monitoring network traffic, wherein traffic further monitored for satellites at ground elements see ¶0017 including UPF, AMF];
generating traffic indications that depict traffic intensity and distribution based on data collected from the constellation of extraterrestrial base stations [Figure 3 shows representation of density of users across the areas and the communication load corresponding to intensity and distribution of traffic, this information known to the system as in ¶0113, and see ¶0117 Figure 6, the map based on information in table 1] identifying one or more regions where traffic exceeds a predetermined threshold using the generated indications [¶0117, traffic within area A densely populated, load is heavy, see ¶0122 traffic of a link for a sub-area reaches a threshold, further Figure 4A-4B, traffic exceeds threshold, ¶0090]; and dynamically adjusting downlink coverage by modifying signal parameters of extraterrestrial base stations to mitigate identified congestion or interference [¶0117 adjust downlink signal parameters for area serviced by satellite 1, e.g. satellite 2 may cover portion of downlink area of satellite 1].
Lin teaches a table, table 1, with density indications for each region, and shows a map of the regions, but does not expressly teach heatmaps. Gupta teaches generating a traffic heatmap for the first geographical area, wherein the traffic heatmap reflects an intensity and distribution of communication traffic across the first geographical area [¶0015, “The systems and methods described herein may use the location data of remote users to build a dynamic heatmap indicating the network locations of the remote users across the SD-WAN. Using the heatmap, if the system identifies a network location having a concentration of remote users and/or traffic that rises above a pre-determined threshold” ]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a heat map representing density of traffic in areas. Lin clearly shows in [0117 table 1 to possess this information to make downlink adjustments and it would have been obvious to generate a heatmap as in Gupta to identify locations with above-threshold concentrations of users and adjust access gateways ¶0015.
Regarding claim 20, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The method of claim 16, further comprising communicating adjustments in downlink coverage to ground-based network control centers for centralized traffic management [Lin ¶0106 after adjustment, based on downlink adjustment not being able to satisfy communication requirement, AMF triggered by a message to allocate another satellite beam to assist based on adjustments in downlink coverage, thus considered communicated adjustments in downlink coverage].
Claim(s) 3, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (“Lin”) (US 20210376919 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Scott et al. (“Scott”) (US 20230019858 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1 wherein generating the traffic heatmap includes one or more communications between the plurality of extraterrestrial base stations to exchange traffic data [Lin, ¶0070, link between satellites to exchange data for users].
Lin teaches exchanging data but not expressly laser however Scott teaches laser communications between the plurality of extraterrestrial base stations to exchange traffic data [¶0070, satellites communicate on Xn interface being OISL known to incorporate lasers].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify lasers in communication. Lin teaches Xn interface ¶0070 and it would have been obvious to specify OISL which is a known Xn interface as in Scott who teaches this allows to exchange aggregated observational data between satellites ¶0070.
Regarding claim 17, see similar rejection for claim 3 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding step.
Claim(s) 5, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (“Lin”) (US 20210376919 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Edge et al. (“Edge”) (US 20150365790 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1, wherein the adjustment of downlink signal parameters is performed in high-traffic regions [¶0117, downlink adjusted in high-traffic area.]
Lin teaches moving beams between modulators but does not teach muting downlink signals.
Edge teaches a standard downlink adjustment at a network device wherein the adjustment of downlink signal parameters includes muting downlink signals [¶0097, during interfering traffic, mute downlink signals].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the adjustment of muting downlink signals as Edge shows this is a standard technique in the art according to known methods to reduce interference for UEs in an area ¶0097.
Regarding claim 18, see similar rejection for claim 5 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding step.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (“Lin”) (US 20210376919 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Myers et al. (“Myers”) (US 10951357 B1).
Regarding claim 6, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1.
Lin teaches adjusting downlink but not reducing power.
Myers teaches wherein the adjustment of signal parameters includes reducing a strength of downlink signals based on a severity of traffic detected [column 8, ll 40-67, based on thermal measurements considered measure of traffic, satellite reduces Tx power, corresponding to reducing signal strength].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify reducing the strength of the downlink as in Myers to account for the high measure of interference being the high traffic condition in reducing signal strength of downlink as in column 8 ll 40-67.
Claim(s) 8, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (“Lin”) (US 20210376919 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Halabian et al. (“Halabian”)(US 20190223198 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Lin-Gupta teaches:
The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 1.
Lin teaches a threshold but not adjustable.
Halabian teaches wherein the predetermined threshold is adjustable based on historical traffic patterns and predictive modeling of network demand [¶0070, a predictive model is generated based on historical usage by UEs and may be adjusted based on the predictive model thus based on historical values].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify an adjustable threshold for traffic quantity as in Halabian. Lin teaches a threshold traffic load and it would have been obvious to adapt it based on historical values and predictive models as in Halabian to achieve means of distribution of admission for which large volumes expected ¶0070.
Regarding claim 19, see similar rejection for claim 3 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding step.
Claim(s) 10-11, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20180062733 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Lin teaches:
A system for dynamic spectrum management and interference mitigation in mobile communications, the system comprising:
a network of extraterrestrial base stations configured to monitor communication traffic [¶0047, satellite 105 in Figure 1, of a plurality of satellites, includes components, such as DBRA control unit, ¶0049, managing bandwidth based on traffic measurements i.e. monitoring];
data processing units within each extraterrestrial base station for analyzing the communication traffic [¶0049 DBRA monitors and analyzes traffic measurements, spectrum resources, past flows] and generating traffic indications based on the communication traffic [¶0054 DBRA on satellite measure downlink flows, service level requirements, and ¶0127, ¶0130, DBRA monitor load to exceed threshold]; and a communication module configured to adjust downlink signal parameters based on the traffic indications [¶0131, adjust downlink beam].
Agarwal teaches at traffic indication representing a measure of traffic flow amount but does not expressly teach heatmaps. Gupta teaches generating a traffic heatmap for the first geographical area, wherein the traffic heatmap reflects an intensity and distribution of communication traffic across the first geographical area [¶0015, “The systems and methods described herein may use the location data of remote users to build a dynamic heatmap indicating the network locations of the remote users across the SD-WAN. Using the heatmap, if the system identifies a network location having a concentration of remote users and/or traffic that rises above a pre-determined threshold” ]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a heat map representing density of traffic in areas. Agarwal clearly shows in ¶0130 possessing this traffic quantity information to make downlink adjustments and it would have been obvious to generate a heatmap as in Gupta to identify locations with above-threshold concentrations of users and adjust access gateways ¶0015.
Regarding claim 11, Agarwal-Gupta teaches:
The system of claim 10, wherein the network of extraterrestrial base stations comprise radio frequency detectors for monitoring uplink and downlink traffic [Agarwal ¶0046-49, ¶0054, DBRA, shown in ¶0130-131 to monitor downlink and uplink traffic].
Regarding claim 15, Agarwal-Gupta teaches:
The system of claim 10, wherein the generation of the traffic heatmaps includes real-time analysis of communication traffic [[Gupta, ¶0014-15, location data used to build heatmap, corresponding to “real-time analysis” see rationale for combination as in claim 10].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20180062733 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Scott et al. (“Scott”) (US 20230019858 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Agarwal-Gupta teaches:
The system of 10, further comprising inter-satellite communication channels for real-time data exchange [Agarwal ¶0046-49 teaches inter satellite links].
Agarwal teaches exchanging data but not expressly laser however Scott teaches laser communications [¶0070, satellites communicate on Xn interface being OISL known to incorporate lasers].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify lasers in communication. Agarwal teaches ISL ¶0046-49 and it would have been obvious to specify OISL which is a known Xn interface as in Scott who teaches this allows to exchange aggregated observational data between satellites ¶0070.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20180062733 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Edge et al. (“Edge”) (US 20150365790 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Agarwal-Gupta teaches:
The system of claim 10.
Agarwal teaches moving beams between modulators but does not teach muting downlink signals.
Edge teaches a standard downlink adjustment at a network device wherein the adjustment of downlink signal parameters includes muting downlink signals [¶0097, during interfering traffic, mute signals].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the adjustment of muting downlink signals as Edge shows this is a standard technique in the art according to known methods to reduce interference for UEs in an area ¶0097.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarwal (US 20180062733 A1) in view of Gupta et al. (“Gupta”) (US 20210160813 A1) and Myers et al. (“Myers”) (US 10951357 B1).
Regarding claim 14 Agarwal-Gupta teaches:
The system of 10.
Agarwal teaches adjusting downlink but not reducing power.
Myers teaches wherein the adjustment of downlink signal parameters includes reducing a strength of downlink signals [column 8, ll 40-67, based on thermal measurements considered measure of traffic, satellite reduces Tx power, corresponding to reducing signal strength].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify reducing the strength of the downlink as in Myers to account for the high measure of interference being the high traffic condition in reducing signal strength of downlink as in column 8 ll 40-67.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20170251379 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L. VOGEL whose telephone number is (303)297-4322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30 PM MT.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at 571-272-3905. 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.
/JAY L VOGEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478