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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for provisional application based on application filed on 12/26/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/25/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CANPLOT et al (2018/0092029) and further in view of Henry et al (U.S. 2016/0316406)
As per claims 1,18, 20 CANPLOT disclosed a device, comprising: a processor; at least one wireless transceiver configured to provide access to a network [The communications circuitry 602 may include circuitry that can operate the physical layer (PHY) communications and/or media access control (MAC) communications for controlling access to the wireless medium, and/or any other communications layers for transmitting and receiving signals. The communication station 600 may also include processing circuitry 606 and memory 608 arranged to perform the operations described herein. In some embodiments, the communications circuitry 602 and the processing circuitry 606 may be configured to perform operations detailed in FIGS. 1-5] (Paragraph. 0067); and a memory communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the memory comprises a neighbor list logic that is configured to: receive a request for a neighbor list from a network device [The machine 700 may additionally include a storage device (i.e., drive unit) 716, a signal generation device 718 (e.g., a speaker), an extended neighbor list and optimized AP discovery device 719, a network interface device/transceiver 720 coupled to antenna(s) 730, and one or more sensors 728, such as a global positioning system (GPS) sensor, a compass, an accelerometer, or other sensor] (Paragraph. 0076);
However, CANPLOT did not explicitly disclose determine a presence of two or more links associated with the network device; and generate an augmented neighbor list based on the two or more links associated with the network device; generate an augmented neighbor list on a per-link basis in response to determining that a neighbor request does not indicate legacy usage; and determine a method of link measurement in response to determining that the neighbor request indicates legacy usage.
In the same field of endeavor Henry disclosed, “In addition, the signaling and scanning burden on the UE 102 can be further reduced by augmenting the neighbor list with only a portion of the femtocell data 202 that includes a subset of femtocells that are close to (e.g., within a predefined distance from) the UE 102. As an example, the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can generate an augmented neighbor list for a UE 102 that can customized based on a current location of the UE 102. Moreover, the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 can be linked with location data that facilitates scanning for the femtocells at respective locations and/or location ranges. For example, a current location of the UE 102 can be identified at the time of initiating the handover based on global positioning (GPS) data, triangulation data, etc. Based on an analysis of the location data, the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can determine a subset of the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 that satisfy a distance criterion (e.g., within a predefined distance from the UE 102), and can augment the neighbor list with only the subset of the femtocells to facilitate the handover. In another example, the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 can be linked with a set of macrocell identifiers (e.g., PCIs), such that the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can identify whether the macrocell identifier of the serving base station is included within the set of macrocell identifiers and can augment the neighbor list with only a subset of the femtocells associated with the serving base station to facilitate the handover. Accordingly, at different locations the UE 102 can be provided with a different augmented neighbor list.” (Paragraph. 0040).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to have incorporated, an “In addition, the signaling and scanning burden on the UE 102 can be further reduced by augmenting the neighbor list with only a portion of the femtocell data 202 that includes a subset of femtocells that are close to (e.g., within a predefined distance from) the UE 102. As an example, the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can generate an augmented neighbor list for a UE 102 that can customized based on a current location of the UE 102. Moreover, the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 can be linked with location data that facilitates scanning for the femtocells at respective locations and/or location ranges. For example, a current location of the UE 102 can be identified at the time of initiating the handover based on global positioning (GPS) data, triangulation data, etc. Based on an analysis of the location data, the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can determine a subset of the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 that satisfy a distance criterion (e.g., within a predefined distance from the UE 102), and can augment the neighbor list with only the subset of the femtocells to facilitate the handover. In another example, the femtocells listed in the femtocell data 202 can be linked with a set of macrocell identifiers (e.g., PCIs), such that the macro base station 104 (and/or a network server) can identify whether the macrocell identifier of the serving base station is included within the set of macrocell identifiers and can augment the neighbor list with only a subset of the femtocells associated with the serving base station to facilitate the handover. Accordingly, at different locations the UE 102 can be provided with a different augmented neighbor list” as taught by Henry in the method and system of CANPLOT to optimize the neighbor’s list and reduce cost.
2. As per claim 2 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the augmented neighbor list comprises a plurality of recommended links (Henry, Paragraph. 0040). Claim 2 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
3. As per claim 3 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the plurality of recommended links are configured on a per-link basis (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0013).
4. As per claim 4 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the neighbor list logic is further configured to gather an available basic service set identifier (BSSID) prior to generating the augmented neighbor list (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0054).
5. As per claim 5 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the neighbor list logic is further configured to determine a recommended BSSID prior to generating the augmented neighbor list (Henry, Paragraph. 0024). Claim 5 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
6. As per claim 6 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the augmented neighbor list is configured with at least the recommended BSSID (Henry, Paragraph. 0024). Claim 6 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
7. As per claim 7 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the neighbor list logic is further configured to evaluate each link associated with the recommend BSSID (Henry, Paragraph. 0041). Claim 7 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
8. As per claim 8 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein each evaluated link is assigned a link identification (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0013).
9. As per claim 9 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein each link is compiled into one or more categories (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0086).
10. As per claim 10 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the augmented neighbor list is formatted for compatibility with legacy network devices (Henry, Paragraph. 0041). Claim 10 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
11. As per claim 11 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the compatibility is achieved through grouping of at least one basic service set identifier (BSSID) (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0054).
12. As per claim 12 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the grouping of the at least one BSSID configures the augmented neighbor list to point to a single entry (CANPLOT, Paragraph. 0054).
13. As per claim 13 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the request for a neighbor list comprises at least a bonding preference for receiving recommendations for pairing with multi-link devices (Henry, Paragraph. 0064). Claim 13 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
14. As per claim 14 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein generating the augmented neighbor list is based on at least the bonding preference (Henry, Paragraph. 0040). Claim 14 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
15. As per claim 15 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein generating the augmented neighbor list comprises at least evaluating at least one performance metric associated with the network device (Henry, Paragraph. 0040). Claim 15 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
16. As per claim 16 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the evaluation comprises utilizing at least one machine-learning process configured to utilize the at least one performance metric as an input (Henry, Paragraph 0039). Claim 16 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
17. As per claim 17 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the at least one performance metric can include: received signal strength indicators, time to last mile performance, or quality of service adherence (Henry, Paragraph 0039). Claim 17 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
18. As per claim 18 CANPLOT-Henry disclosed wherein the neighbor list logic is further configured to transmit the augmented neighbor list to the network device (Henry, Paragraph 0040). Claim 18 has the same motivation as to claim 1.
Response to Arguments
19. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
20. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
21. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the
examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885.
22. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal
business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821.
23. 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 un published applications is available through Private PAIR only. For
more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you
have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business
Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights