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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 29th March 2024 and 8th May 2024 are 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
Claims 1 – 6, 9 – 12, 13 – 15 and 16 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hobbs et al (US 2015/0282069 A1).
Claim 15 (similarly Claims 1 and 12). Hobbs shows a system (figs. 1 and 6: power management subsystem 112) comprising: at least one memory element for storing data (fig. 6: memory 606); and at least one processor for executing instructions associated with the data (fig. 6: processing device 604), wherein executing the instructions causes the system to perform operations, comprising: obtaining capability information for each of one or more devices wirelessly connected to an access point of a wireless local area network ([0007]: the remote units can wirelessly communicate (RF) with terminal devices in a coverage zone; [0033]: the measurement module 114 can be used to determine or otherwise obtain a utilization metric for one or more of the remote units 106a, 106b, 106c); determining a power policy for the access point based, at least in part, on the capability information obtained for each of the one or more devices wirelessly connected to the access point ([0033]: the measurement module 114 can determine or otherwise obtain a utilization metric based on monitoring system traffic in the DAS 102); and enforcing the power policy for the access point ([0033]: the optimization module 116 can be used to determine whether one or more remote units 106a, 106b, 106c are underutilized based on the utilization metric), wherein the enforcing includes maintaining the access point in a full-power state ([0036]: the presence or absence of sensed objects or activities can be used by the power management subsystem 112 to determine whether full-power coverage is desirable) or causing the access point to operate in a low-power state ([0033]: the optimization module 116 can configure the DAS 102 to operate in a low-power mode based on determining that one or more remote units 106a, 106b, 106c are underutilized… the optimization module 116 can be used to configure one or more of the remote units 106a, 106b, 106c into a low-power mode when the remote unit is underutilized; [0074]: a power management subsystem 112 can be used to manage power for a telecommunication system that includes multiple macro-cell base stations, multiple small-cell base stations, multiple remote radio heads, etc. wherein the power management subsystem 112 can be used to manage power consumption in telecommunication systems involving distributed communication with a higher propensity for imbalance of use – base station or remote unit(s) can be an access point).
Claim 2 (similarly claim 16). Hobbs shows the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the capability information for each of the one or more devices wirelessly connected to the access point includes: obtaining the capability information via an advertisement of the capability information by at least one device ([0045]: system traffic in the DAS 102 can include uplink traffic received by one or more of the remote units 106a, 106b, 106c; [0046]: the occupancy level can be used to obtain the utilization metric, either alone or in combination with other data (e.g. levels of uplink traffic received by remote units)).
Claim 3. Hobbs shows the method of claim 1, further comprising: obtaining access point capability information from the access point ([0069]: a unit 104 (e.g. power management subsystem 112) that is communicatively coupled to a base station 101 may receive data from the base station 101 regarding the location of a terminal device… can determine from the location of the terminal device that the terminal device is near one or more coverage zones of the DAS 102), wherein the determining is based additionally on the access point capability information ([0074]: a power management subsystem 112 can be used to manage power for a telecommunication system that includes multiple macro-cell base stations, multiple small-cell base stations, multiple remote radio heads, etc. wherein the power management subsystem 112 can be used to manage power consumption in telecommunication systems involving distributed communication with a higher propensity for imbalance of use).
Claim 4 (similarly claim 13). Hobbs shows the method of claim 1, wherein determining the power policy for the access point further comprises: classifying the one or more devices based on the obtained capability information to generate a device policy for each of the one or more devices that indicates, at least in part, whether each of the one or more devices is capable of being disconnected from the access point ([0030]-[0031] discuss each remote unit (e.g. 106a, 106b, 106c, etc.) will be evaluated for individual power utilization, and any power-underutilizing remote unit will be switch back to low-power mode; [0052]: configuring a remote unit 106 for low-power operation can involve deactivating one or more devices).
Claim 5. Hobbs shows the method of claim 4, wherein determining the power policy for the access point further comprises: determining, based on the capability information, whether any device that is wirelessly connected to the access point is capable of being disconnected from the access point ([0050] and [0052] discuss remote unit(s) power utilization monitoring and deactivation).
Claim 6. Hobbs shows the method of claim 5, further comprising: based on determining that at least one device that is wirelessly connected to the access point is not capable of being disconnected from the access point, enforcing the power policy for the access point includes maintaining the access point in the full-power state ([0050]: utilization metrics for respective remote units 106a, 106b may have values that are greater than the threshold utilization and the power management subsystem 112 can respond to determining that these values of the utilization metrics are greater than the threshold utilization by continuing to operate the remote units 106a, 106b in a high-power mode); or based on determining that every device that is wirelessly connected to the access point is capable of being disconnected from the access point, enforcing the power policy for the access point includes triggering the access point to enter into the low-power state ([0050]: the utilization metrics for a remote unit 106c may have a value that is less than the threshold utilization and the power management subsystem 112 can respond to determining that this value of the utilization metric is less than the threshold utilization by configuring the remote unit 106c to operate in a low-power mode).
Claim 9 (similarly claim 18). Hobbs shows the method of claim 4, wherein the device policy generated for each of the one or more devices further indicates temporal information related to whether each of the one or more devices is capable of being disconnected from the access point ([0055]: the remote unit 106 can operate in a low-power mode by suspending coverage for one or more of RF bands (e.g. by not providing service in those RF bands during a given time period) wherein suspending coverage for one or more of RF bands can allow the remote unit 106 to deactivate devices in corresponding receive and transmit paths).
Claim 10 (similarly claims 14 and 19). Hobbs shows the method of claim 1, further comprising: for the access point operating in the low-power state, obtaining a trigger from a particular device that seeks to connect with the access point ([0057]: the remote unit 106 can subsequently activate or increase power consumption by transmitters and receivers in the transceiver in response to receiving a command from the power management subsystem 112 to increase signal coverage by the remote unit 106), wherein the trigger causes the access point to enter into the full-power state (see above).
Claim 11 (similarly claim 20). Hobbs shows the method of claim 1, further comprising: providing to the one or more devices an indication that power management capabilities are provided for the wireless local area network ([0031]: the power management subsystem 112 can transmit or otherwise provide a control signal to the remote unit 106c that causes the remote unit 106c to operate in a low-power mode).
Claim 17. Hobbs shows the system of claim 15, wherein determining the power policy for the access point further comprises: classifying the one or more devices based on the obtained capability information to generate a device policy for each of the one or more devices that indicates, at least in part, whether each of the one or more devices is capable of being disconnected from the access point ([0030]-[0031] discuss each remote unit (e.g. 106a, 106b, 106c, etc.) will be evaluated for individual power utilization, and any power-underutilizing remote unit will be switch back to low-power mode; [0052]: configuring a remote unit 106 for low-power operation can involve deactivating one or more devices); and determining, based on the capability information, whether any device that is wirelessly connected to the access point is capable of being disconnected from the access point ([0050] and [0052] discuss remote unit(s) power utilization monitoring and deactivation).
---------- ---------- ----------
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hobbs et al in view of Atefi (US 2020/0229096 A1).
Claim 7. Hobbs shows the method of claim 5; Hobbs does not very expressly describe wherein determining the power policy for the access point further comprises: determining that at least one secondary device that is wirelessly connected to the access point is capable of being disconnected from the access point if at least one primary device is not wirelessly connected to the access point.Atefi teaches feature of determining that at least one secondary device that is wirelessly connected to an access point is capable of being disconnected from the access point if at least one primary device is not wirelessly connected to the access point ([0155]: if/when an apparatus (e.g. STA/AP) operates according to the aforementioned third mode/state/configuration (in which its primary/main radio/receiver may be/operate in an off/low-/lower-/inactive/doze power mode/state/configuration and its secondary radio/receiver may be/operate in an on/high-/higher-/active power mode/state/configuration), the apparatus (e.g. STA) may be configured to inactivate, hold, stop, suspend, or otherwise not maintain/implement one or more communication aspects/windows (e.g. one or more service periods previously negotiated between the apparatus (e.g. (STA) and another apparatus (e.g. AP/another-STA))).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 primary and secondary devices disconnection scheme as taught by Atefi in the power policy of Hobbs enable relatively faster download and/or upload of information, relatively less latency, and/or relatively less power consumption, which may provide various technical benefits and may improve the overall user experience.
========== ========== ==========
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
---------- ---------- ----------
Conclusion
The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
1. Ang et al, US 2016/0150474 A1: a wireless communication device configured to while a first transmitter and/or first receiver is in a sleep state, wake a second receiver for a synchronization period to listen for a synchronization signal from a wireless network; receive the synchronization signal with the second receiver; establish synchronism with the wireless network in accordance with the synchronization signal; and wake the first transmitter and/or receiver from the sleep state to communicate with the wireless network.
2. Mofidi et al, US 2017/0164289 A1: a system that detects a likely presence of a narrow band signal in the presence of wide-band interference without powering up a wireless receiver.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xavier Szewai Wong whose telephone number is 571.270.1780. The examiner can normally be reached on 11:30 am - 8:30 pm Mon to Fri.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571.270.1215. 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 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). 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.
/XAVIER S WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415 21st March 2026