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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 13 and 18-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “a UE in the communications network provides measurements that may trigger a handover.” The term “may” is a permissive term that renders the scope of the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the method is repeated only when a handover is actually triggered or if it includes any arbitrary measurements that have a theoretical possibility of triggering a handover.
Claim 18 recites “determining whether … has resulted in a negative outcome.” The term “negative outcome” is a term of degree or a subjective term that lacks an objective standard in the art. While claim 19 provides examples of such outcomes (e.g., connection loss), the phrase “one or more of” in claim 19 suggests that “negative outcome” could encompass other unspecified conditions. Without a clear definition or boundary for what constitutes “negative,” a person of ordinary skill in the art would not know when the condition of the claim is met.
Furthermore, Claim 20 recites a “negative outcomes have occurred above a predetermined frequency.” It is unclear from the claim or the specification who predetermines this frequency or what the criteria for this determination are. This introduces further ambiguity regarding the operational threshold of the claimed method.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8, 13, 17-19, 22, and 43-44 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Song et al. (Korea Patent Publication No. KR1020150068651, hereinafter “Song”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Song (Translated by WIPO translate) unless otherwise mentioned.
With respect to independent claims
Regarding claim 1, Song teaches A method for allocation of User Equipments, UEs (Fig. 1, MTs(mobile terminals)), in a communications network comprising one or more access nodes (Fig. 1)(para [0065]: the vertical handover method according to the present embodiment may be performed by the base station 700, and the operations included in the vertical handover method may be performed by a component included in the base station 700 or the base station 700.), the method comprising:
analysing the power consumption of the one or more access nodes (para [0066]: In operation 810, when one traffic including a plurality of frames is transmitted to the mobile terminal through the downlink, the base station 700 May identify candidate base stations accessible in the plurality of wireless networks every transmission start of each frame. For example, the candidate base station identification unit 720 May perform operation 810 under the control of the at least one processor 710.)(Translated by WIPO translate) (para [0067]: In operation 820, the BS 700 May calculate an expected total cost for total power consumption required for processing one traffic. For example, the expected total cost calculator 730 May perform operation 820 under the control of the at least one processor 710.) ;
determining, for a UE, whether the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed (para [0068]: In operation 830, the base station 700 May select a candidate base station in which the expected total cost is the lowest from among the candidate base stations. For example, the candidate base station selector 740 May perform operation 830 under the control of the at least one processor 710.) (para [0070]: In another embodiment, the expected total cost may be calculated further using a cost for the power required when executing the handover (interpreted as “if the allocation of the UE was changed”).); and
if it is determined that the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed, changing the UE allocation (para [0068]: In operation 830, the base station 700 May select a candidate base station in which the expected total cost is the lowest from among the candidate base stations. For example, the candidate base station selector 740 May perform operation 830 under the control of the at least one processor 710.) (para [0070]: In another embodiment, the expected total cost may be calculated further using a cost for the power required when executing the handover (interpreted as “if the allocation of the UE was changed”).) (para [0073]: Operation 840 May optionally be included in a vertical handover method as needed. In operation 840, the BS 700 May determine whether to perform handover for each handover decision epoch before the transmission start of each frame.);
or
if it is determined that the net power consumption of the communications network would not be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed, retaining the current UE allocation (para [0073]: Operation 840 May optionally be included in a vertical handover method as needed. In operation 840, the BS 700 May determine whether to perform handover for each handover decision epoch before the transmission start of each frame.) (para [0074]: As such, according to embodiments of the present disclosure, it is possible to minimize the overall power consumption required for transmitting one traffic in the heterogeneous wireless network environment through the proposed vertical handover. In addition, the last part of the entire handover decision point required for processing one traffic does not perform the handover determination itself, thereby leading to an additional power saving.)
(Fig. 5 and para [0063] by Google Translate: Figure 5 is a graph illustrating the total number of handovers as a function of varying handover costs. Figure 5 demonstrates that the total number of handovers decreases as the handover cost increases. This implies that, from the perspective of power saving, maintaining the connection with the current base station (BS)—even if the link quality with that BS is relatively inferior to that of other BSs—can be an effective strategy, provided that the nominal network service rate is guaranteed through dynamic power control. The rationale for this is that performing a handover incurs a specific cost, and this handover cost (`power consumption’) may potentially exceed the transmission power savings realized through the handover itself.)
(Examiner’s note: Due to inaccuracies found in the WIPO machine translation of para [0063] of Song included in this Office Action, the Google Translate version has been used instead.) The Original Korean text of para [0063] is reproduced herein below for reference.)
PNG
media_image1.png
244
1618
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(para [0063] in original publication of Song)
Song teaches a method for deciding whether to perform a handover (“changing UE allocation”) by comparing the potential power savings against the `handover cost’ at Operation 840 (see Fig. 6 and paras [0073], [0074] of Song).
Furthermore, Fig. 5 and para [0063] discloses that “The rationale for this is that performing a handover incurs a specific cost, and this handover cost may potentially exceed the transmission power savings realized through the handover itself.” This comparison determines whether the “net power consumption” of the network would actually be reduced. Song explicitly teaches that even if the link quality of the current base station is relatively poor compared to other BSs, “maintaining the connection with the current base station (BS) can be an effective strategy” from the perspective of power saving (see para [0063] of Song). The handover cost refers power consumption (see para [0033]).
Song, therefore, teaches the claimed feature “if it is determined that the net power consumption of the communications network would not be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed, retaining the current UE allocation” of claim 1.
.
Regarding claim 22, it is a communications network claim corresponding to the method claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 43, it is a communications network claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except limitations “analyser configured to…” “a determinator configured to” and “an allocator configured to” (Fig. 7 and para 0065): and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. (See Fig. 7 and para [0065]: FIG. 7 is a block diagram illustrating an internal configuration of a base station according to an embodiment of the present invention, and FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating a vertical handover method according to an embodiment of the present invention. As illustrated in FIG. 7, the base station 700 according to the present embodiment may include at least one processor 710, a candidate base station identification unit 720, an expected total cost calculation unit 730, and a candidate base station selection unit 740. In addition, the vertical handover method according to the present embodiment may be performed by the base station 700, and the operations included in the vertical handover method may be performed by a component included in the base station 700 or the base station 700.)
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim 2, Song teaches The method of claim 1, wherein changing the allocation of the UE comprises allocating the UE to a different access node and/or allocating the UE to a different radio access technology, RAT (para [0006]: A vertical handover method in heterogeneous wireless networks, …) (para [0068]: In operation 830, the base station 700 May select a candidate base station in which the expected total cost is the lowest from among the candidate base stations. ) (para [0073]: Operation 840 May optionally be included in a vertical handover method as needed. In operation 840, the BS 700 May determine whether to perform handover for each handover decision epoch before the transmission start of each frame.).
Regarding claim 3, Song teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the changing of the UE allocation comprises executing a handover from the current UE allocation to the new UE allocation (Fig. 1: Vertical handoff decision). Fig. 1 of Song is reproduced herein below.
Regarding claim 4, Song teaches The method of claim 3, wherein the determination of whether or not the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed comprises estimating the power consumption due to the handover (para [0070]: In another embodiment, the expected total cost may be calculated further using a cost for the power required when executing the handover (interpreted as “if the allocation of the UE was changed”).) (para [0073]: Operation 840 May optionally be included in a vertical handover method as needed. In operation 840, the BS 700 May determine whether to perform handover for each handover decision epoch before the transmission start of each frame.), the estimate comprising estimating the power consumption if the handover is performed, and estimating the power consumption if the handover is not performed (Fig. 5 and para [0063]: FIG. 5 is a graph illustrating the total number of handovers according to different handover costs. FIG. 5 shows that the total number of handovers is reduced as the handover cost increases. From the viewpoint of power saving, it means that the fact that the link quality with the current BS is better than the link quality with other BSs can be effective in maintaining the current BS while guaranteeing the network nominal service rate through dynamic power control. This is because the handover cost may be greater than the saving of the transmission power obtained through handover when the handover is performed.) (Fig. 6 and para [0064]: FIG. 6 is a graph illustrating the number of handovers generated at each handover decision point according to a change in a dispatch factor when K is 9 in a scenario 1 environment. In this case, it is assumed that the number of frames constituting one traffic is 10. The fact that it can be seen through FIG. 6 is that a handover does not occur at the time of the last two consecutive handover decision regardless of the dispatch factor. Further, as the handover cost increases, it is possible to easily predict that the number of determination times at which the handover does not continuously occur at the end will increase. Therefore, the vertical handover method to be additionally proposed through the result of FIG. 6 is to reflect the traffic size and the network characteristics to which the BS belongs, so that the handover determination itself is not considered at the time of determining the handover between the last alignment. Each of the BSs should transmit and receive various information to neighboring BSs for handover determination, and perform handover decision based on the received information. This is very complex, but since the process itself is not performed at the time of determining the handover, the additional power saving may be derived.).
Regarding claim 8, Song teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the determination of whether or not the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed comprises estimating a traffic profile of the UE and/or a traffic profile of the class of UE and/or a mobility profile of the UE (para [0059]: The MT is located within a colored area formed from two BSs, and considers a situation in which the MT is selectively connectable to two BSs during a traffic processing time. For simplicity of simulation, it is assumed that the remaining parameters except for the service rate are the same. In addition, two simulation scenarios may be considered in order to check a difference in simulation results according to a difference in cell size. Scenario 1 considers a case of a large cell, and scenario 2 considers a case of a small cell.) (para [0060]: A vertical handover method to be proposed through simulation (hereinafter, referred to as a power-optimized VHO algorithm) and a performance between an SNR-based algorithm and a NO-VHO algorithm are compared. A signal-to-noise ratio-based algorithm is a method of determining a handover execution by comparing a signal-to-noise ratio from a currently connected BS with a signal-to-noise ratio value of other BSs, and is the most commonly used method due to the advantage of a simple hardware configuration. In addition, the NO-VHO algorithm may not generate the handover cost as a method of not performing handover during one traffic processing period.) (Fig. 4 and para [0062]: FIG. 4 is a graph illustrating expected overall power consumption according to different handover costs. FIG. 4 illustrates expected overall power consumption according to a change in handover cost. As the handover cost increases, FIG. 4 shows that the power-optimal VHO algorithm obtains an expected overall cost lower than the signal-to-noise ratio-based algorithm and the NO-VHO algorithm regardless of the cell size.) (Fig. 6 and para [0064]: FIG. 6 is a graph illustrating the number of handovers generated at each handover decision point according to a change in a dispatch factor when K is 9 in a scenario 1 environment. In this case, it is assumed that the number of frames constituting one traffic is 10. The fact that it can be seen through FIG. 6 is that a handover does not occur at the time of the last two consecutive handover decision regardless of the dispatch factor. Further, as the handover cost increases, it is possible to easily predict that the number of determination times at which the handover does not continuously occur at the end will increase. Therefore, the vertical handover method to be additionally proposed through the result of FIG. 6 is to reflect the traffic size and the network characteristics to which the BS belongs, so that the handover determination itself is not considered at the time of determining the handover between the last alignment (interpreted as “estimating a traffic profile of the UE and/or a traffic profile of the class of UE and/or a mobility profile of the UE”). Each of the BSs should transmit and receive various information to neighboring BSs for handover determination, and perform handover decision based on the received information. This is very complex, but since the process itself is not performed at the time of determining the handover, the additional power saving may be derived.) (para [0070]: In another embodiment, the expected total cost may be calculated further using a cost for the power required when executing the handover (interpreted as “if the allocation of the UE was changed”).).
Regarding claim 13, Song teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the method is repeated each time a UE in the communications network provides measurements that may trigger a handover (para [0066]: In operation 810, when one traffic including a plurality of frames is transmitted to the mobile terminal through the downlink (interpreted as “the method is repeated each time a UE in the communications network provides measurements that may trigger a handover”, the one traffic may trigger a handover), the base station 700 May identify candidate base stations accessible in the plurality of wireless networks every transmission start of each frame. …) (para [0067]: In operation 820, the BS 700 May calculate an expected total cost for total power consumption required for processing one traffic. For example, the expected total cost calculator 730 May perform operation 820 under the control of the at least one processor 710.).
Regarding claim 17, Song teaches The method of claim 1, wherein:
the method determines, for a plurality of UEs, whether the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocations of the plurality of UEs was changed (para [0025]: Each active MT (interpreted as “plurality of UEs”) may be expressed as one traffic flow composed of homogeneous K +1 frames as shown in FIG. 2. After transmitting K +1 frames, the active MT is in an inactive state and leaves the system until again activated. Since each MT can only connect to only one BS, a handover decision is required before transmission of every frame after transmission of the first frame (presence of a total K handover decision epoch).) In operation 810,) (Fig. 6 and para [0064]: FIG. 6 is a graph illustrating the number of handovers generated at each handover decision point (interpreted as “if the allocations of the plurality of UEs was changed”) according to a change in a dispatch factor when K is 9 in a scenario 1 environment.) ; and
if it is determined that the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the plurality of UEs was changed, the allocation of the plurality of UEs is changed (Fig. 6 and para [0064]: Each of the BSs should transmit and receive various information to neighboring BSs for handover determination, and perform handover decision based on the received information.).
Regarding claim 18, Song teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising determining whether controlling the UE allocation based on the determined effect on the net power consumption of the communications network has resulted in a negative outcome
(Fig. 5 and para [0063] by Google Translate: Figure 5 is a graph illustrating the total number of handovers as a function of varying handover costs. Figure 5 demonstrates that the total number of handovers decreases as the handover cost increases. This implies that, from the perspective of power saving, maintaining the connection with the current base station (BS)—even if the link quality with that BS is relatively inferior to that of other BSs—can be an effective strategy, provided that the nominal network service rate is guaranteed through dynamic power control. The rationale for this is that performing a handover incurs a specific cost, and this handover cost (`power consumption’) may potentially exceed the transmission power savings realized through the handover itself.) (Examiner’s note: Due to inaccuracies found in the WIPO machine translation of para [0063] of Song included in this Office Action, the Google Translate version has been used instead.) The Original Korean text of para [0063] is reproduced herein below for reference.)
PNG
media_image1.png
244
1618
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(para [0063] in original publication of Song)
Regarding claim 19, Song teaches The method of claim 18, wherein the negative outcome comprises one or more of UE connection loss and termination of existing UE data sessions (para [0063]: the link quality with the current BS is not as good (interpreted as “one or more of UE connection loss”) as the link quality with the BSs).
Regarding claim 44, Song teaches A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed on processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform the method according to claim 1 (para [0077]: The method according to the embodiment may be implemented in the form of program instructions that can be executed through various computer means and recorded in a computer-readable medium. The computer-readable medium may include program instructions, data files, data structures, etc. alone or in combination.).
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.
Claim(s) 5-7, 9-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Umapathy et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20210007023, hereinafter “Umapathy”).
Regarding claim 5, Song teaches The method of claim 4, Song fails to teach wherein the power consumption due to the handover is estimated using a Machine Learning, ML, model that has been trained to estimate power consumptions due to handovers.
It is noted that while disclosing “the expected total cost may be calculated by further using a predetermined discount factor according to an expectation value when a policy and an initial state are given, an expected value when a random variable is given, and an importance of a future cost at the current time point, based on a Markov decision process (MDP). In this case, the policy may be determined using at least one of a dynamic programming and a value iteration algorithm through a Belman optimal equation,” Song does not specifically teach about wherein the power consumption due to the handover is estimated using a Machine Learning, ML, model that has been trained to estimate power consumptions due to handovers.
It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Umapathy. Umapathy is directed to a handover prediction scheme that is based on contextual awareness of a compute node, such as a mobile device. Umapathy further discloses “a handover (HO) prediction scheme that is based on contextual awareness. “Contextual awareness” may involve predicting a target location based on a current position and/or time, as well as other parameters/data. The target location is a position/location where a computing device is likely to travel to, or intending to travel to. Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an HO using the predicted target location and known (e.g., a priori) information about the networks, network elements, and network quality in the predicted target location.” (See para [0015] of Umapathy)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Song's method by using the features (“Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an Handover using the predicted target location and known information about the networks, network elements, and network quality in the predicted target location” of Umapathy to use algorithms and/or statistical models to perform specific task(s) without using explicit instructions, but instead relying on patterns and inferences (see para [0256] of Umapathy) in order to estimate power consumption due to the handover.
Regarding claim 6, Song and Umapathy teach The method of claim 5, Umapathy further teach wherein the ML model is a neural network (para [0115] of Umapathy: FIG. 6 illustrates an example neural network (NN) 600 in accordance with various embodiments. NN 600 may be suitable for use by one or more of the subsystems and/or the various embodiments discussed herein, implemented in part by a hardware accelerator or processor circuitry.).
Regarding claim 7, Song and Umapathy teach The method of claim 5, Umapathy further teach wherein the ML model is trained using data from the one or more access nodes (para [0015] of Umapathy: Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an HO using the predicted target location and known (e.g., a priori) information about the networks, network elements, and network quality in the predicted target location (interpreted as “trained using data from the one or more access nodes”). This allows the computing system to proactively connect to a most optimal target network/NAN while a session is still in progress. And, when the connection with a source network/NAN eventually breaks, the computing system will have already connected to the optimal target network/NAN.).
Regarding claim 9, Song teaches The method of claim 8, wherein the traffic profile of the UE and/or of the class of UE is estimated using a further Machine Learning, ML, model that has been trained to estimate traffic profiles of UEs and/or traffic profiles of classes of UEs
It is noted that while disclosing “the vertical handover method to be additionally proposed through the result of FIG. 6 is to reflect the traffic size and the network characteristics to which the BS belongs, so that the handover determination itself is not considered at the time of determining the handover between the last alignment. Each of the BSs should transmit and receive various information to neighboring BSs for handover determination, and perform handover decision based on the received information” (see Fig. 6 and para [0064]) and “the policy may be determined using at least one of a dynamic programming and a value iteration algorithm through a Belman optimal equation” (see para [0071]), Song does not specifically teach about using a further Machine Learning, ML, model that has been trained to estimate traffic profiles of UEs and/or traffic profiles of classes of UEs.
It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Umapathy. Umapathy is directed to a handover prediction scheme that is based on contextual awareness of a compute node, such as a mobile device. Umapathy further discloses “a handover (HO) prediction scheme that is based on contextual awareness. “Contextual awareness” may involve predicting a target location based on a current position and/or time, as well as other parameters/data. The target location is a position/location where a computing device is likely to travel to, or intending to travel to. Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an HO using the predicted target location and known (e.g., a priori) information about the networks, network elements, and network quality in the predicted target location.” (See para [0015] of Umapathy)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Song's method by using the features (“Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an Handover using the predicted target location and known information about the networks, network elements, and network quality in the predicted target location” of Umapathy to use algorithms and/or statistical models to perform specific task(s) without using explicit instructions, but instead relying on patterns and inferences (see para [0256] of Umapathy) in order to estimate traffic profiles of UEs and/or traffic profiles of classes of UEs.
Regarding claim 10, Song and Umapathy teach The method of claim 9, Umapathy further teach wherein the further ML model is a neural network (para [0115] of Umapathy: FIG. 6 illustrates an example neural network (NN) 600 in accordance with various embodiments. NN 600 may be suitable for use by one or more of the subsystems and/or the various embodiments discussed herein, implemented in part by a hardware accelerator or processor circuitry.).
Regarding claim 11, Song and Umapathy teach The method of claim 9, Umapathy further teach wherein the further ML model is trained using data from a plurality of UEs (Fig. 1 and para [0015]: The present disclosure describes a handover (HO) prediction scheme that is based on contextual awareness. “Contextual awareness” may involve predicting a target location based on a current position and/or time, as well as other parameters/data. The target location is a position/location where a computing device is likely to travel to, or intending to travel to. Machine learning (ML) and/or Artificial Intelligence (AI) models make recommendations about a target network, radio access technology (RAT), and/or network access node (NAN) for an HO using the predicted target location and known (e.g., a priori) information about the networks, network elements (see Fig. 1 and one or more UEs 111, 121 (121a, 121b), interpreted as “using data from a plurality of UEs”), and network quality in the predicted target location.) .
Claim(s) 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Huang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150049681, hereinafter “Huang”).
Regarding claim 12, Song teaches The method of claim 8, Song fails to teach wherein the mobility profile of the UE is obtained from a Core Network Node, CNN, of the communications network.
Huang is directed to scheduling and resource allocation techniques to improve quality of service provided to the UE.
Huang, in analogous art, teaches the mobility profile of the UE is obtained from a Core Network Node, CNN, of the communications network (Fig. 5 and para [0046] of Huang: the serving access point 102 of system 500 can determine whether to enable DC and/or determine the scheduling of data transmission from the serving access point 102 to the UE 104 (e.g., on ABS or non-ABS) based on estimating speed/motion/direction of travel of the UE 104.) (Fig. 5 and para [0048] of Huang: the speed estimation component 502 (of the serving AP 102 of system 500) can obtain handover (HO) information related to the UE 104 (interpreted as “mobility profile of the UE”), for example, from upper layer elements of the core network. The handover information can be indicative of an HO count (e.g., the number of HOs performed by the UE 104 within a specified time period). As an example, if the HO count is high (e.g., greater than a predefined threshold), the speed estimation component 502 can determine that the UE 104 is moving at a high speed and if the HO count is low (e.g., less than or equal to the predefined threshold), the speed estimation component 502 can determine that the UE 104 is moving slowly (or is stationary).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Song's method by using the features (“handover (HO) information related to the UE and indicating a speed of UE)” of Huang to estimate a mobility profile of the UE in order to determine whether or not the net power consumption of the communications network would be reduced if the allocation of the UE was changed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WON JUN CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1695. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 08:00 - 17:00.
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, Derrick W Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/WON JUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2411 /DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411