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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to amendment filed on 06/12/2026.
Claims 1, 3 – 5, 8, 10 – 12, 14 and 16 – 18 are amended.
Claims 1 – 20 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/12/2026 with respect to claims 1 – 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant amended the independent claims 1, 8 and 14 . The amendments have changed the scope of the claims; therefore, a new ground of rejection has been made in view of previously cited prior art Oroskar et al. (US 9,386,627 B1) and a new prior art Walsh et al. (US 2010/0161340 A1).
Applicant argued on page 1: last paragraph – page 2: 1st paragraph of the remark, that “none of the references disclose or suggest responsive to determining the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold during the voice call, transitioning a type of codec of the voice call from an original type of codec to an alternative type of codec between the originating wireless device and a Media Gateway (MGW)".
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments. The prior cited art Oroskar teaches transitioning from an original type of codec to an alternative type of codec (Col.3: lines 47 – 49 and lines 64 – 67) between the originating wireless device and a Media Gateway (MGW) (Fig.4 and Col.18: line 44 – 45). The new prior art Walsh teaches in Fig.1 and ¶ [0012], ¶ [0014] that at block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, If no (e.g., at or below the threshold level or outside of a threshold range), a higher quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 110. When using the lower quality codec, a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels to switch back to a higher quality codec. Here, the lower & the higher quality codecs are considered as an original type of codec and an alternative type of codec, respectively. Thus, Walsh teaches the new limitation of the claim. Accordingly, applicant’s argument is moot.
Applicant argued on page 2: last paragraph of the remark, that “claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 depend from one of independent claims 1, 8, and/or 14 thus incorporating the limitations recited therein. Therefore, the hypothetical combination of the above references cannot be said to obviate these claims, and the rejections must be withdrawn”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s remark and conclusion. Since, the independent claims 1, 8 and 14 are not allowable, therefore, the dependent claims are not patentable by virtue of their dependency from the independent claims. Accordingly, applicant’s argument is not appropriate.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with all the arguments filed by the applicant. All arguments and remarks are replied in detail in the rejection section below. Finally, examiner would like to cite a new prior art BAEDER et al. (US 2008/0192760 A1) that also discloses (at least abstract and ¶ [0018]) the limitation in question.
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 section 102 of this title, 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.
Claims 1 – 2, 4 – 5, 8 – 9, 11 – 12, 14 – 15 and 17 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oroskar et al. (Oroskar hereinafter referred to Oroskar) (US 9,386,627 B1) in view of Walsh et al. (Walsh hereinafter referred to Walsh) (US 2010/0161340 A1).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claim 1, Oroskar teaches a method (Title, Customized Call Setup Procedure Based On Predicted Call Quality), the method comprising:
monitoring a signal quality metric (Col.2: line 21 – 25, WCD continuously monitor signal strength from various available sectors; Col.12: line 11, the WCD monitors a signal-to-noise metric) of an originating wireless device during a voice call with a terminating wireless device (Col.3: line 47, a call is setup between two WCDs; Fig. 4 and Col.18: line 40 – 43, an originating WCD (labeled “O-WCD”) 402 is shown as placing a call to a terminating WCD (labeled “T-WCD”) 410; Col.12: line 14 – 20, The WCD reports the received signal strengths to the serving base station);
and
transitioning a type of codec of the voice call (Col.3: line 61 – 63, For some types of calls, a particular type of codec is selected) from an original type of codec (Col.3: line 47 – 49, When a call is setup between two WCDs, a codec is selected for each WCD in a manner that matches their capabilities) to an alternative type of codec (Col.3: line 64 – 67, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup; Then, an updated codec selection is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs. Here, the initial codec is an original type of codec and updated codec is an alternative type of codec) between the originating wireless device and a Media Gateway (MGW) (Fig.4 and Col.18: line 44 – 45, Network elements involved the message flow include an originating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 404, an MSC/MGW (media gateway) 406, and a terminating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 408;. As mentioned above, the updated/ alternative codec is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs and the MGW is between the WCDs; therefore, it is obvious to consider that transitioning of the codec is placed between the originating wireless device and the MGW).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold; and
responsive to determining the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold during the voice call, transitioning a type of codec.
However, Walsh teaches a method (Title, Dynamic Codec Switching), the method (Fig.1 and [0014]) comprising:
monitoring a signal quality metric ([0012], audio signal quality or interference level is continuously monitored; Fig.1 and [0014], At block 104, an audio signal quality or interference level of the audio signal is determined)
determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold ([0012], a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels); and
responsive to determining the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, If no (e.g., at or below the threshold level or outside of a threshold range), a higher quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 110) during the voice call ([0011], Interference threshold levels or ranges are pre-determined based upon empirical tests for telephone-grade audio. Here, the audio signal is considered as a voice call), transitioning a type of codec of the voice call from an original type of codec to an alternative type of codec ([0012], when using the lower quality codec, a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels to switch back to a higher quality codec. Here, the lower & the higher quality codecs are considered as an original type of codec and an alternative type of codec, respectively).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oroskar as mentioned above and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claim 8, Oroskar teaches (Title, Customized Call Setup Procedure Based On Predicted Call Quality) a system (Fig.2 and Col.8: line 16 – 17, a wireless network 200), the system comprising:
a session border gateway (Fig.2 and Col.9: line 6 – 7, a serving gateway S-GW 216, a packet data network gateway PDN-GW 218) including at least one electronic processor configured to perform operations (Col.9: line 61- Col.10: line 1, system such as network 200 are typically implemented as a combination of one or more integrated and/or distributed platforms, each comprising one or more computer processors, one or more forms of computer-readable storage, one or more communication interfaces for interconnection between elements and the network and operable to transmit and receive the communications and messages described herein. Here, the system 200 includes several element/ components; therefore, it is obvious to consider that the system comprises a session border gateway to perform the operations), the operations including:
monitoring a signal quality metric (Col.2: line 21 – 25, WCD continuously monitor signal strength from various available sectors; Col.12: line 11, the WCD monitors a signal-to-noise metric) of a wireless device during a voice call (Col.3: line 47, a call is setup between two WCDs; Fig. 4 and Col.18: line 40 – 43, an originating WCD (labeled “O-WCD”) 402 is shown as placing a call to a terminating WCD (labeled “T-WCD”) 410; Col.12: line 14 – 20, The WCD reports the received signal strengths to the serving base station);
and
transitioning a type of codec of the voice call (Col.3: line 61 – 63, For some types of calls, a particular type of codec is selected) from an original type of codec (Col.3: line 47 – 49, When a call is setup between two WCDs, a codec is selected for each WCD in a manner that matches their capabilities) to an alternative type of codec (Col.3: line 64 – 67, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup; Then, an updated codec selection is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs. Here, the initial codec is an original type of codec and updated codec is an alternative type of codec) between the wireless device and a Media Gateway (MGW) (Fig.4 and Col.18: line 44 – 45, Network elements involved the message flow include an originating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 404, an MSC/MGW (media gateway) 406, and a terminating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 408;. As mentioned above, the updated/ alternative codec is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs and the MGW is between the WCDs; therefore, it is obvious to consider that transitioning of the codec is placed between the originating wireless device/ wireless device and the MGW).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold; and
responsive to determining the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold during the voice call, transitioning a type of codec.
However, Walsh teaches (Title, Dynamic Codec Switching) a system (Fig.3 and [0019], system 200), comprising:
monitoring a signal quality metric ([0012], audio signal quality or interference level is continuously monitored; Fig.1 and [0014], At block 104, an audio signal quality or interference level of the audio signal is determined)
determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold ([0012], a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels); and
responsive to determining the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, If no (e.g., at or below the threshold level or outside of a threshold range), a higher quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 110) during the voice call ([0011], Interference threshold levels or ranges are pre-determined based upon empirical tests for telephone-grade audio. Here, the audio signal is considered as a voice call), transitioning a type of codec of the voice call from an original type of codec to an alternative type of codec ([0012], when using the lower quality codec, a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels to switch back to a higher quality codec. Here, the lower & the higher quality codecs are considered as an original type of codec and an alternative type of codec, respectively).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oroskar as mentioned above and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claim 14, Oroskar teaches a method (Title, Customized Call Setup Procedure Based On Predicted Call Quality), the method comprising:
receiving a request to start a voice call from an originating wireless device (Fig. 4 and Col.18: line 40 – 43, an originating WCD (labeled “O-WCD”) 402 is shown as placing a call to a terminating WCD (labeled “T-WCD”) 410);
negotiating a negotiated type of codec for use in the voice call with a receiving wireless device (Col.3: line 61 – 67, For some types of calls, a particular type of codec is selected, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup. Here, the terminating WCD 410 is a receiving wireless device and the initial codec is a negotiated type of codec);
using the negotiated type of codec for the voice call (Col.3: line 64 – 67, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup);
monitoring a signal quality metric (Col.2: line 21 – 25, WCD continuously monitor signal strength from various available sectors; Col.12: line 11, the WCD monitors a signal-to-noise metric) during the voice call (Col.3: line 47, a call is setup between two WCDs; Col.12: line 14 – 20, The WCD reports the received signal strengths to the serving base station); and
transitioning from the negotiated type of codec (Col.3: line 47 – 49, When a call is setup between two WCDs, a codec is selected for each WCD in a manner that matches their capabilities) to an alternative type of codec (Col.3: line 64 – 67, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup; Then, an updated codec selection is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs. Here, the updated codec is an alternative type of codec) between the originating wireless device and a media gateway (Fig.4 and Col.18: line 44 – 45, Network elements involved the message flow include an originating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 404, an MSC/MGW (media gateway) 406, and a terminating base station (labeled “T-BS”) 408;. As mentioned above, the updated/ alternative codec is negotiated between the originating and terminating WCDs and the MGW is between the WCDs; therefore, it is obvious to consider that transitioning of the codec is placed between the originating wireless device and the MGW) of a cellular provider of the originating wireless device (Col.1: line 36 – 39, subscriber (or user) in a service provider's wireless communication system accesses the system for communication services via a Wireless Communication Device (“WCD”); Line 48 – 51, a communication path or “channel” is established between the WCD and the transport network, via the air interface, the BTS, NodeB or eNodeB, the BSC or RNC, and the switch or gateway. Here, the gateway/ MGW is considered as cellular provider of the originating wireless device).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
upon the signal quality metric dropping below a threshold during the voice call, transitioning from the negotiated type of codec.
However, Walsh teaches a method (Title, Dynamic Codec Switching), the method (Fig.1 and [0014]) comprising:
monitoring a signal quality metric ([0012], audio signal quality or interference level is continuously monitored; Fig.1 and [0014], At block 104, an audio signal quality or interference level of the audio signal is determined)
determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below a threshold ([0012], a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels); and
upon the signal quality metric dropping below a threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, If no (e.g., at or below the threshold level or outside of a threshold range), a higher quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 110) during the voice call ([0011], Interference threshold levels or ranges are pre-determined based upon empirical tests for telephone-grade audio. Here, the audio signal is considered as a voice call), transitioning from the negotiated type of codec to an alternative type of codec ([0012], when using the lower quality codec, a determination is made when the audio signal quality or interference level is sufficiently below threshold levels to switch back to a higher quality codec. Here, the lower & the higher quality codecs are considered as a negotiated type of codec and an alternative type of codec, respectively).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oroskar as mentioned above and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
(Original) Regarding claims 2, 9 and 15, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claims 1, 8 and 14, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar further teaches
wherein the signal quality metric comprises Mean Opinion Score (MOS), or (Due to alternative language “or’ in the claims, examiner addresses one limitation only) a signal-to-noise ratio (Col.12: line 11, the WCD monitors a signal-to-noise metric).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claims 4, 11 and 17, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claims 1, 8 and 14, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar does not specifically teach
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold; and
negotiating a negotiated (/re-negotiating another) type of codec for use on the voice call with the terminating (/ receiving) wireless device.
However, Walsh teaches
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, and in one example is determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range); and
negotiating a negotiated (/re-negotiating another) type of codec for use on the voice call with the terminating (/ receiving) wireless device (Fig.1 and [0014], determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range; If yes, a lower quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 108. Here, the lower quality codec is a negotiated/ another type of codec).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar and Walsh as mentioned in claims 1, 8 and 14 and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claims 5 and 12, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claims 1 and 8, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar further teaches
configuring the voice call to use the original type of codec (Col.3: line 64 – 67, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup. Here, the initial codec selection is the original type of codec, as mentioned in claims 1 and 8) between the originating wireless device and the MGW (same as claims 1 and 8).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold; and
configuring the voice call to use the original type of codec, wherein the original type of codec was assigned to the voice call when the voice call began.
However, Walsh teaches
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, and in one example is determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range); and
configuring the voice call to use the original type of codec (Fig.1 and [0014], determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range; If yes, a lower quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 108. Here, the lower quality codec is the original type of codec, as mentioned in claims 1 and 8), wherein the original type of codec was assigned to the voice call when the voice call began ([0014], the default setting is that the audio signal is processed with a lower quality codec. Here, the default setting; i.e. the lower quality codec is the original type of codec was assigned to the voice call when the voice call began).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar and Walsh as mentioned in claims 1 and 8 and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claim 18, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claim 14 as outlined above.
Oroskar further teaches
configuring the voice call to use the negotiated type of codec (Col.3: line 61 – 67, For some types of calls, a particular type of codec is selected, an initial codec is selected during a phase of call setup. Here, the initial codec is the negotiated type of codec, as mentioned in claim 14).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold.
However, Walsh teaches
determining that the signal quality metric has risen to meet or exceed the threshold (Fig.1 and [0014], At block 106, the determined audio signal quality or interference level is examined relative to a threshold interference level, and in one example is determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range); and
configuring the voice call to use the negotiated type of codec (Fig.1 and [0014], determined or classified whether the signal quality or signal interference level is above the threshold interference level or within a threshold interference range; If yes, a lower quality codec signal processing is performed on the signal at block 108; the default setting is that the audio signal is processed with a lower quality codec. Here, the lower quality codec is the negotiated type of codec, as mentioned in claim 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar and Walsh as mentioned in claim 14 and further incorporate the teaching of Walsh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a method and apparatus for processing an improved quality audio signal and benefits of reduced interference and increased range (Walsh, Abstract, [0003] and [0016]).
Claims 3, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oroskar in view of Walsh and further in view of Mufti (US 2018/0324235 A1).
(Currently Amended) Regarding claims 3, 10 and 16, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claims 1, 8 and 14, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar does not specifically teach
wherein the alternative type of codec is Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) codec.
However Mufti teaches (Title, NETWORK GATEWAY TRANSCODER-UTILIZATION-AWARE SESSION CONTROL)
wherein the alternative type of codec is Enhanced Voice Services (EVS) codec ([0026], Voice calls using VoLTE is encoded or decoded using any one of a variety of codecs, e.g., an AMR codec or an EVS codec).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar and Walsh as mentioned in claims 1, 8 and 14 and further incorporate the teaching of Mufti. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a network gateway that can transcode data of those sessions using transcoding units, and determine a utilization of the transcoding units. The anchoring network device can determine that the utilization satisfies a load criterion. The anchoring network device can adjust capability information of at least one session to reduce load on the network gateway. It also provides an increasing the number of concurrent sessions that a network can support (Mufti, Abstract).
Claims 6 – 7, 13 and 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oroskar in view of Walsh and further in view of KHAY-IBBAT et al. (KHAY-IBBAT hereinafter referred to KHAY-IBBAT) (US 2016/0226785 A1).
(Original) Regarding claims 6, 13 and 19, combination of Oroskar and Walsh teaches all the features with respect to claims 1, 8 and 14, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar further teaches
wherein the monitoring the signal quality metric of a wireless device during a voice call comprises periodically receiving the signal quality metric from the wireless device, and determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below (Col.2: line 21 – 25, a WCD continuously monitor signal strength from various available sectors and notify a BSC when a given sector has a signal strength that is sufficiently higher than the sector in which the WCD is currently operating; Col.12: Line 5 – 7, a WCD continuously monitors signal strength from various available sectors and notify a BSC when a given sector has a signal strength that is sufficiently higher than the sector in which the WCD is currently operating. Here, the signal strength sufficiently higher than the current operating sector means the signal quality metric is lower/ below in the sector the WCD is currently operating. Since, the signal strength is monitored continuously, therefore, it is obvious to consider that the signal quality metric from the wireless device is received periodically).
Oroskar does not specifically teach
wherein the determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below the threshold comprises determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below the threshold for a number of consecutive periods.
However, KHAY-IBBAT teaches (Title, DEVICE-INITIATED CODEC RATE CHANGE DURING A VOICE CALL)
wherein the determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below the threshold ([0049], if a measured signal quality is less than a threshold signal quality indicative of a poor channel quality for the codec rate being used, a threshold for requesting a lower codec rate is satisfied) comprises determining that the signal quality metric has dropped below the threshold for a number of consecutive periods ([0052], the threshold evaluation module 220 is configured to determine that a codec rate change should be requested only if the last n consecutive channel quality measurements provided by the channel quality measurement module 218 have satisfied the threshold; the threshold evaluation module 220 is configured to determine that a codec rate change should be requested only if n of the last m, where m is an integer larger than n, channel quality measurements provided by the channel quality measurement module 218 have satisfied the threshold; the threshold evaluation module 220 is configured to evaluate whether a threshold has been satisfied over a period of time. Here, n consecutive channel quality measurements are done and the decision is made based on over a period of time; therefore, it is obvious to consider that the signal quality metric has dropped below the threshold for a number of consecutive periods).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar and Walsh as mentioned in claims 1, 8 and 14 and further incorporate the teaching of KHAY-IBBAT. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a wireless communication device to more readily adapt to changing channel conditions during a VoIP call, such as a VoLTE call, thereby improving user experience by reduced audio interruptions and call drops (KHAY-IBBAT, Title and [0024]).
(Original) Regarding claims 7 and 20, combination of Oroskar, Walsh and KHAY-IBBAT teaches all the features with respect to claims 6 and 19, respectively as outlined above.
Oroskar does not specifically teach
wherein the number of consecutive periods is at least 2.
However, KHAY-IBBAT teaches
wherein the number of consecutive periods is at least 2 ([0052] and [0087], at least n consecutive channel quality measurements satisfy the threshold; the channel quality has satisfied the threshold for an amount of time exceeding some threshold period of time. Here, the at least n consecutive channel quality measurements satisfy the threshold and the time duration exceeds some threshold period of time; therefore, it is obvious that the number of consecutive periods is at least 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified combination of Oroskar, Walsh and KHAY-IBBAT as mentioned in claims 6 and 19 and further incorporate the teaching of KHAY-IBBAT. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a wireless communication device to more readily adapt to changing channel conditions during a VoIP call, such as a VoLTE call, thereby improving user experience by reduced audio interruptions and call drops (KHAY-IBBAT, Title and [0024]).
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 ROWNAK ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8009. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached on 571-272-2832. 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.
/ROWNAK ISLAM/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights