ETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on 29 February 2024. Claims 24-38 are pending for examination.
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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
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.
Claims 24-26, 32-33, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Di Girolamo et al. (US 20230171795 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 20120182961 A1). With regarding Claim 24, Di Girolamo disclose an apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.): receive a value of an interference stability metric from at least one access point (See FIG. 2, and ¶[0099]-[0103], [0136]-[0142]. Discloses a network node gNB receiving quantified channel/load measurements from subordinates UEs or access points, including channel busy ratio (CBR), Channel Occupancy (CO), RSRP, and SINR reports, which are used to evaluate link stability and configure sidelink operation; determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically to the at least one access point for the at least one access point to switch to a distributed interference management mode from a centralized interference management mode based on the value of the interference stability metric and a period between the resource allocation messages (See FIG. 12C, 14-15, and ¶[0038]-[0040], [0099]-[0105], [0136]-[0142].
[0095] Triggers to Change Mode
[0096] Numerous events or triggers may result in a UE changing the resource allocation mode of one or more of its SLRBs. Eight example triggers are as follows.
[0099] Third, the UE SLRB may be configured with thresholds related to load. For example related to channel busy ratio (CBR), or channel occupancy (CO). If the measured load is above this configured threshold, the UE may change to resource allocation mode to Mode 1 for this SLRB, in order to reduce the probability of collision on the sidelink resources. Similarly if the load is below this threshold, the UE may change to resource allocation mode to Mode 2 for this SLRB, in order to reduce the transmission latency. Note that the thresholds may be (pre)configured per UE or per SLRB. In addition, the configuration may have 2 thresholds (one for triggering a Mode 2-to-Mode 1 transition, and another for triggering a Mode 1-to-Mode 2 transition).[0136] In order to provide this information to the gNB, the UE using Mode 1 resource allocation must be configured for this measurement. This configuration may include the following six items, for example. First is periodicity of the measurement report. Second is the resource pool to measure.
[0038] Sidelink resource allocation refers to the process by which a UE determines the resources to use for sidelink transmission. 5G NR supports 2 basic modes of Resource allocation. In Mode 1 (network controlled), a base station schedules sidelink resource(s) to be used by UE for sidelink transmission(s). The UE has to be in RRC_CONNECTED and UE has to be in coverage. In Mode 2 (UE autonomous), the UE makes the determination. The base station does not schedule. Sidelink transmission resource(s) are within sidelink resources configured by base station/network or pre-configured in the UE. The UE may be in RRC_CONNECTED, RRC_IDLE, or RRC_INACTIVE and UE may be in-coverage or out-of-coverage.0101] Five, the UE SLRB may be configured to toggle the resource allocation mode based on whether the UE is monitoring PDCCH on its Uu link. For example, if the UE is configured with a DRX cycle for its Uu link, the UE may change the resource allocation mode to Mode 2 during the DRX OFF periods (periods when the UE is not listening for PDCCH).
Disclosed dynamic switching between Mode1 (centralized or network-scheduled) and Mode 2 (distributed or UE-autonomous) based on configured load or interference thresholds (CBR/CO) and periodic monitoring intervals (DRX OFF periods, measurement gaps).; and transmit an indication of the condition to the access point (See FIG. 15, and ¶[0005],[0103]-[0107], [0142], [0162]-[0163].
[0107] In order to enable the gNB to configure both modes, the gNB must be aware if the UE is capable of supporting simultaneous Mode 1/Mode 2. It is proposed that this capability be added as a new UE capability and provided to the serving cell in a UECapabilityEnquiry exchange, a new RRC message exchange, or a NAS layer message exchange. For example, this may be in a new sl-Parameters IE that is included in the UECapabilityInformation message. When configuring the SLRBs for the UE, the network would then include a configuration for both Mode 1 (for example through the SL-ScheduledConfig IE) and Mode 2 (for example through the SL-UE-SelectedConfig IE). In addition, the network would also include the resource allocation mode to be used for each SLRB. For example, a new resourceAllocation IE included in the SL-RadioBearerConfig IE, or SL-RLC-BearerConfig IE, or SL-RLC-Config IE.
Disclosed the network entity signals the calculated threshold or condition to the subordinate node via standardized control messaging so the node can locally execute the mode transition). Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically to the at least one access point. However, in analogous art, Kim disclose determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically to the at least one access point (See FIG. 1-3, and ¶[0005]-[0009], [0012]-[0016], [0164]-[0168]. [0164] When failed to receive N consecutive UL bursts from the terminal in the region indicated by the UL PA MAP or UL BA MAP, the base station determines that the terminal has failed to receive the UL PA MAP, and accordingly retransmits the UL PA MAP to the terminal at the following persistent allocation period.
[0165] Here, each burst transmission may be performed while the HARQ retransmission is in progress. The value N may be set to a global variable, or transmitted to the terminal via a system information transfer message (for example, SFH IEs, SCD message, other broadcast messages, etc.)
[0005] Accordingly, the control channel or control message, which is initially transmitted, may also include period information relating to the next allocation region.
[0167] That is, when failed to decode the first and second UL bursts (S906, S907), the base station retransmits the UL PA MAP to the terminal at the moment of the third UL burst being transmitted (S908).Disclosed Monitoring of periodic resource allocation messages, counting consecutive decoding failures, and triggering a fallback to autonomous operation when a reliability threshold is met. The threshold is inherently tied to both the channel or interference condition and the periodicity of the control messages.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim to modify Di Girolamo teaches receiving interference or load stability metrics, defining centralized (mode 1) vs. distributed (Mode 2) operation, triggering mode switches based on periodic intervals (DRX or gaps), and transmitting configuration or condition indications to the UE/ Access point. Kim teaches monitoring periodic resource allocation messages, explicitly counting consecutive failures, and triggering a fallback or reconfiguration condition that scales with message periodicity and channel conditions. This combination resulting reliably maintains overlay coordination when interference is stable and gracefully transitions to autonomous operation during sustained control-channel degradation. With regarding Claim 25, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo disclose wherein the condition is inversely proportional to the period between the resource allocation messages (See FIG. 1-4, and ¶[0038], [0042]-[0048], [0101].Disclosed configured grant periodicity, DRX or measurement gap cycles affecting monitoring behavior). Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose wherein the condition is inversely proportional to the period between the resource allocation messages. However, in analogous art, Kim disclose determine (See FIG. 1-4, and ¶[0005]-[0009], [0131]-[0135, [0164], [0168].
[0005] Accordingly, the control channel or control message, which is initially transmitted, may also include period information relating to the next allocation region.
[0008] The base station located at an initial frame informs the terminal of the allocation region information to transmit the VoIP packet through UL-MAP. Afterwards, at a fourth or eighth frame corresponding to each period, the base station does not inform the region information via the UL-MAP and allocates only the region for the VoIP packet transmission.
[0009] Here, the period allocated for the VoIP packet transmission is 4 frames (i.e., 20 ms). That is, the terminal may store region allocation information included in the UL-MAP received from the initial frame, and then transmit a VoIP packet via a corresponding region although the UL-MAP is not additionally received from the fourth and eighth frames corresponding to the allocation period.[0164] When failed to receive N consecutive UL bursts from the terminal in the region indicated by the UL PA MAP or UL BA MAP, the base station determines that the terminal has failed to receive the UL PA MAP, and accordingly retransmits the UL PA MAP to the terminal at the following persistent allocation period.
[0165] Here, each burst transmission may be performed while the HARQ retransmission is in progress. The value N may be set to a global variable, or transmitted to the terminal via a system information transfer message (for example, SFH IEs, SCD message, other broadcast messages, etc.)
Disclosed a network that transmits resource allocation or control messages at fixed, predetermined intervals. The explicitly structures recovery or switching conditions around the configured allocation period, teaching that the switching threshold must scale inversely with the messaging interval to maintain consistent link reliability.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim to modify Di Girolamo teaches configured grant periodicity, DRX measurement gap cycles affecting monitoring behavior. Kim teaches fallback or recovery behavior to the persistent allocation period. This combination resulting maintains consistent link reliability across varying scheduling configurations by ensuring the fallback trigger responds to the time duration of stale control information rather than a static loss count.
With regarding Claim 26, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo disclosed wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.): transmit an indication of a requested type of the interference stability metric to the access point (See ¶[0099], [0136]-[0139], [0107]. [0136] the UE using Mode 1 resource allocation must be configured for this measurement. This configuration may include the following six items, for example. First is periodicity of the measurement report. Second is the resource pool to measure.Disclosed that the overlay network actively controls what interference related information it receives form access points by transmitting configuration messages that specify the type of metric to be measured and reported. This configuration is transmitted via standardized signaling (RRC, MAC CE, or DCI), enabling the network to tailor interference management decisions to specific deployment scenarios without requiring the access point to report all possible metric types. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim to modify Di Girolamo teaches network configured measurement types CSI reporting, CBR/CO reporting, RRM measurements, indicating which metric type to report allows the network to optimize signaling overhead and target specific interference management objectives. With regarding Claim 32, Di Girolamo disclose an apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (See FIG. 16F); and
at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.):
determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically from an overlay network;
receive the resource allocation messages from the overlay network when in a centralized interference management mode (See ¶[0038], [0063]-[0065], [0084]-[0085]. Disclosed centralized resource allocation inherently relies on the subordinate node ); and switch to a distributed interference management mode, in response to detecting a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages meeting the determined condition(See ¶[0038], [0066]-[0068], [0101], [0145]-[0146]. Disclose that when centralized grant monitoring fails or conditions degrade, the UE toggles or switches to Mode2 (UE autonomous or distributed) where it autonomously selects resources via sensing/contention without network scheduling.). Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically from an overlay network; in response to detecting a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages meeting the determined condition. However, in analogous art, Kim disclose determine a condition for a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages transmitted periodically from an overlay network(See ¶[0005]-[0009], [0012]-[0016], [0052], [0164]-[0168]. [0164] When failed to receive N consecutive UL bursts from the terminal in the region indicated by the UL PA MAP or UL BA MAP, the base station determines that the terminal has failed to receive the UL PA MAP, and accordingly retransmits the UL PA MAP to the terminal at the following persistent allocation period.
[0165] Here, each burst transmission may be performed while the HARQ retransmission is in progress. The value N may be set to a global variable, or transmitted to the terminal via a system information transfer message (for example, SFH IEs, SCD message, other broadcast messages, etc.)Disclosed that subordinate nodes continuously monitor for expected periodic scheduling messages. They calculate or are preconfigured with a numerical threshold or condition is determined based on the periodic transmission schedule and required link reliability.); in response to detecting a number of consecutively lost resource allocation messages meeting the determined condition (See ¶[0012]-[0016], [0020]-[0023], [0164]-[0168]. Disclosed that when the consecutive loss counter meets the predetermined condition, the apparatus triggers fallback or reconfiguration autonomous allocation procedures.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim to modify Di Girolamo teaches network configured measurement types CSI reporting, CBR/CO reporting, RRM measurements, indicating which metric type to report allows the network to optimize signaling overhead and target specific interference management objectives. With regarding Claim 33, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 32, wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.):
Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose carry out, before the switching to the distributed interference management mode, resource allocation based on a latest successfully received resource allocation message. However, in analogous art, Kim disclose carry out, before the switching to the distributed interference management mode, resource allocation based on a latest successfully received resource allocation message (See ¶[0005]-[0009], [0014]-[0016], [0082]-[0085]. Discloses that the terminal stores allocation information from a successfully received MAP and continues transmitting in subsequent periods using that stored information, even when new control messages are not received.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kim to modify Di Girolamo teaches mode switching architecture. Kim teaches storing allocation parameters from the last successfully decoded control message and continuing resource allocation using those parameters when subsequent message are lost or before triggering fallback or recovery procedures. This combination yields improvements in service continuity without unexpected technical results. With regarding Claim 36, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 36 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 25, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
Claims 27, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Di Girolamo et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claims 24/32 above, and further in view of Park et al (US 20190074883 A1). With regarding Claim 27, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo disclosed wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.): transmit an indication of a requested type of the interference stability metric to the access point (See ¶[0038], [0],, and wherein the interference stability metric is inversely proportional to a standard deviation of measured or predicted interference values over at least one period of time, or wherein the interference stability metric is inversely proportional to a difference between an n-the percentile and a median of the measured or predicted interference values over the at least one period of time (See ¶[0099], [0136]-[0142]. Disclose that UEs or access points measure and report channel or load stability metrics over configured periodic intervals to enable the network to assess link volatility). Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose transmit an indication of a requested type of the interference stability metric to the access point. However, in analogous art, Park disclose transmit an indication of a requested type of the interference stability metric to the access point (See ¶[0008], [0393]-[0403], [0410]-[0412]. Disclose that a network entity (eNB or gNB) transmits measurement configuration information to subordinate nodes (UEs/APs) that explicitly specifies which type of interference or channel measurement to perform and report, such as interference measurement restriction(I-MR), channel measurement restriction (C-MR) , or specific CSI process configurations). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Park to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo teaches APS measuring interference or load metrics over periodic intervals, reporting them for mode1 or mode 2 decisions. Park teaches requested type signaling mechanism. This combination enables the overlay network to dynamically tailor interference reporting to current deployment conditions requesting robust percentile based metrics during volatile interference scenarios. With regarding Claim 35, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 35 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 27, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
Claims 28-29, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Di Girolamo et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claims 24/32 above, and further in view of Ray et al (US 20210194569 A1). With regarding Claim 28, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo disclosed wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.): transmit the resource allocation messages periodically to the access point (See ¶[0038]-[0061], [0063], [0142], [0099], [0109]-[0110]. Disclosed that in a network controlled (centralized) operational mode, the base station or overlay network routinely transmits scheduling grants or resource allocation configurations to subordinate access points); and in the case a request for switching to the centralized interference management mode is received, consider whether the switching is acceptable based on a level of interference reported by the access point and/or transmission power requested by the access point. Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose and in the case a request for switching to the centralized interference management mode is received, consider whether the switching is acceptable based on a level of interference reported by the access point and/or transmission power requested by the access point. However, in analogous art, Ray disclose in the case a request for switching to the centralized interference management mode is received, consider whether the switching is acceptable based on a level of interference reported by the access point and/or transmission power requested by the access point (See ¶[0120]-[0127], [0151]. Disclosed subordinate nodes transmitting mode-switch requests to the network, and the network evaluating these request against real time signal interference/power conditions before granting or denying the transition.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ray to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo teaches the periodic RA transmission framework and centralized IM architecture. Ray teaches subordinate nodes transmission mode switch requests to the network, and the network evaluating these requests against real-time signal or interference or power conditions before granting or denying the transition. This combination ensure that centralized interference management is only restored when the overlay network verifies that reported inference and requested power levels are within acceptable bounds. With regarding Claim 29, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo disclose wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.):
transmit the resource allocation messages periodically to the access point (See ¶[0038], [0061], [0065], [0142], [0103]-[0107], [0162]. Disclose that in a network controlled operational state, the base station routinely transmits scheduling grants and resource allocation configurations to subordinate access points at fixed, preconfigured intervals.); and Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose in the case a request for switching to the centralized interference management mode is received, consider whether the switching is acceptable based on a level of interference reported by the access point and/or transmission power requested by the access point, and wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: determine to accept the request for switching to the centralized interference mode; and transmit an acceptance message for the request for switching to the centralized interference mode to the access point. However, in analogous art, Ray disclose in the case a request for switching to the centralized interference management mode is received, consider whether the switching is acceptable based on a level of interference reported by the access point and/or transmission power requested by the access point (See ¶[0120]-[0127], [0136], [0151]. Disclosed that subordinate network elements can explicitly transmit a control message requesting a transition back to network-coordinated mode when link conditions stabilize.), and wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to:
determine to accept the request for switching to the centralized interference mode (See ¶[0123]-[0130]. Disclosed that after evaluating the request against interference, signal strength, and power conditions, the network entity makes an explicit determination to approve the mode transition); and
transmit an acceptance message for the request for switching to the centralized interference mode to the access point (See ¶[0123]-[0130]. Disclose the mode switch response messaging workflow, directly mapping to acceptance message.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ray to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo teaches the periodic centralized scheduling architecture and mode framework. And Ray teaches explicit switch-back request workflow, network evaluation logic, and acceptance signaling. This combination ensures that centralized interference management is only restored when the overlay network verifies that reported interference and requested power levels are within acceptable bounds. With regarding Claim 37, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 37 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 29, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
Claims 30-31, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Di Girolamo et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claims 24/32 above, and further in view of Geirhofer et al (US 20110243010 A1). With regarding Claim 30, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose, disclose the apparatus according to claim 24. Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose wherein in the centralized interference management mode the apparatus is configured to perform interference management for the access point and one or more other access points, and wherein in the distributed interference management mode the apparatus is configured not to perform interference management for the access point and the one or more other access points. However, in analogous art, Geirhofer disclose wherein in the centralized interference management mode the apparatus is configured to perform interference management for the access point and one or more other access points, and wherein in the distributed interference management mode the apparatus is configured not to perform interference management for the access point and the one or more other access points (See ¶[0007]-[0009], [0050]-[0052], [0113]-[0115], [0059]-[0060].Disclosed that in centralized mode, a network entity coordinates IM for multiple APs; in distributed mode, the network steps back and APs self-manage interference autonomously.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Geirhofer to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo teaches modern terminology mode 1 and mode2 confirming that network abstention during distributed. Geirhofer teaches the explicit network role in each mode active coordination vs explicit abstention. This combination system implements a standard hierarchical IM architecture where the network’s operational defined per mode. With regarding Claim 31, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 24, Di Girolamo may not explicitly disclose wherein the access point is configured to provide a local subnetwork. However, in analogous art, Geirhofer disclose wherein the access point is configured to provide a local subnetwork(See ¶[0035]-[0036], [0050], [0098]-[0099], [0113]. Disclosed a P2P server or access point architecture that forms and manages localized P2P groups/Subnetworks, directly mapping to the claimed limitation P2P groups or subnetworks. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Geirhofer to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo and Kim teaches Supplies the centralized or distributed IM as mode1 and mode2 switching framework. Geirhofer teaches P2P groups as subnetworks. This combination implements a standard hierarchical wireless architecture where a local access point manages a subnetwork while interfacing with an overlay network for coordination and fallback control.
With regarding Claim 38, through of a different scope, the limitations of claim 38 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 30, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Di Girolamo et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claims 24/32 above, and further in view of Sahin et al (US 20190364453 A1).
With regarding Claim 34, Di Girolamo and Kim disclose the apparatus according to claim 32, Di Girolamo disclosed wherein the at least one memory and the computer code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to: (See FIG. 16F and ¶[0189]-[0190], [0221]-[0223], [0099], [0136]-[0142]. Disclosed processor-memory architectures.): Di Girolamo and Kim may not explicitly disclose determine a value of an interference stability metric; and determine the condition based on the value of the interference stability metric and a period of the resource allocation messages, or
transmit the value of the interference stability metric to the overlay network and receive information on the condition from the overlay network However, in analogous art, Sahin disclose determine a value of an interference stability metric (See ¶[0067]-[0069], [0097]-[0098]. Disclosed network node or mesh station actively measures received interference power profiles channel quality indicators and signal correlation data during scheduled measurement campaigns, and complies these measurements into quantitative interference matrices.); and
determine the condition based on the value of the interference stability metric and a period of the resource allocation messages, or
transmit the value of the interference stability metric to the overlay network and receive information on the condition from the overlay network (See ¶[0072], [0085]-[0088], [0095], [0117]-[0119], [0127]. [0072] The initiating node may identify the neighbors that create interference above a predetermined threshold based on the interference reports.[0086] The OAM center may inform each node regarding the cluster it belongs in via IMF, 920 (e.g. as shown in FIG. 2.) The OAM center may determine the measurement scheduling of the clusters and convey the IMF of each cluster, 925.Disclosed computing interference metrics, nodes transmit measurement reports to a centralized OAM or network entity. The centralized entity processes these reports alongside scheduling parameters, determines the appropriate operational thresholds, and transmits the resulting condition information back to the originating node.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sahin to modify Di Girolamo and Kim. Di Girolamo teaches the cellular or sidelink context where these conditions are tied to periodic resource allocation and centralized mode switching. Sahin teaches the measurement, reporting, centralized threshold, determination condition feedback loop. This combination yields the overlay network to compute and signal the switching condition based on AP- reported interference stability and scheduling periodicity.
Conclusion
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIVAKRISHNA VALLAMDASU whose telephone number is (571)272-5249. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Marcus R Smith can be reached at 5712701096. 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.
/SHIVAKRISHNA VALLAMDASU/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights