DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/726,433 filed on 07/03/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
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 § 101
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §101 which forms the basis for all patent-ineligible rejections set forth in this Office action:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The factual inquires set forth in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 134 (2014), that are applied for establishing a background for determining patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining whether the claim is directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
2A. Determining whether the claim is directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea (judicially recognized exceptions).
2B. Determining whether the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim(s) 25-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 as being directed to patent-ineligible subject matter. The rationale for this determination is explained below. Representative claim 25 recites: “acquiring first radio wave quality information on a current radio wave quality between a plurality of communication terminals and a plurality of antennas; acquiring communication requirement information on respective communication requirements required for the plurality of communication terminals; selecting one or more communication terminals being targets of communication, from among the plurality of communication terminals, by using past information including at least second radio wave quality information on a past radio wave quality between the plurality of communication terminals and the plurality of antennas, the first radio wave quality information, and the communication requirement information; and selecting one or more antennas to be used when communicating with the one or more communication terminals, from among the plurality of antennas, by using the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information”.
Step 1: Statutory Category
Claim(s) 25-42 are directed to a statutory category subject matter, reciting a method. Claim(s) 43 is directed to a statutory category subject matter, reciting an apparatus. Claim(s) 44 is directed to a statutory category subject matter, reciting a non-transitory computer-readable medium.
Step 2A: Judicial Exception
However, the claimed process/machine/manufacture/composition-of-matter in representative claims 25, 43 and 44 are considered to be patent-ineligible subject matter because it is directed to an abstract idea. Applicant’s claimed invention, directed to the abstract idea recited in the claim language with respect to the step(s) of “acquiring first radio wave quality information on a current radio wave quality between a plurality of communication terminals and a plurality of antennas; acquiring communication requirement information on respective communication requirements required for the plurality of communication terminals; selecting one or more communication terminals being targets of communication, from among the plurality of communication terminals, by using past information including at least second radio wave quality information on a past radio wave quality between the plurality of communication terminals and the plurality of antennas, the first radio wave quality information, and the communication requirement information; and selecting one or more antennas to be used when communicating with the one or more communication terminals, from among the plurality of antennas, by using the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information.”, relates to the judicially recognized abstract idea of “Acquiring and Selecting information, monitoring and accumulating records about receipt of selecting information (Two-Way Media ‘187 and ‘005 patents)”.
A relevant inquiry is to ask whether the claims are directed to improvements in the technology and functionalities of the devices and apparatuses featured in the claim, versus being simply directed to an abstract idea. (see, e.g., Enfish; McRo) Here, the recited claim limitations and the filed specification do not provide any material technical details or steps for improving the technology and functionalities of a conventional radio communication system which involves the controls communication performance between a control apparatus and a plurality of communication terminals. Instead, the claimed invention and Applicant’s Specification merely state in general terms the objective of achieving such improvement.
Step 2B: Additional Steps/Elements Significantly More than the Judicial Exception
Furthermore, the recited claim limitations fail to recite any additional steps/elements that when considered both individually or as an ordered combination transform the claimed steps determined in step 2A above as abstract concepts, into a patent-eligible application of an abstract idea that is significantly more than such abstract idea.
The recited claim limitations fail to provide any limitations that individually or as an ordered combination transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible application of that idea. The limitations taken individually or as an ordered combination provide for nothing more than what is expected and are considered to be well-understood, routine, conventional features that are known to and practiced in the industry.
Therefore, in summary, representative claim 1 is rejected under Section 101 for being directed to a judicial exception, i.e., abstract idea, without significantly more. Any claim not mentioned, including dependent claims, is rejected by virtue of dependency and because they do not obviate the grounds for rejection set forth above by providing any meaningful limitations that result in the claim as a whole being significantly more than an abstract concept.
Claims 26-42 are rejected for at least the reasons stated above. Claims 26-42 depend on claim 25; however, they do not add any feature or subject matter that would solve any deficiencies of claim 25.
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, 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 25, 39-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennis et al. (Pub. No. 2014/0269300 A1 hereinafter Bennis) in view of Avidor et al. (Pub. No. 2007/0135139 A1 hereinafter Avidor).
Regarding claim 25, Bennis teaches “a control method comprising: acquiring first radio wave quality information on a current radio wave quality between a plurality of communication terminals and a plurality of antennas;” as [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions and completion time of each transmission… Note: “the instantaneous channel conditions” correspond to the claimed “radio wave quality information”] “acquiring communication requirement information on respective communication requirements required for the plurality of communication terminals;” [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions and completion time of each transmission… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements… Note: “QoS requirements “and “traffic requirements” correspond to the claimed “communication requirement information”] “selecting one or more communication terminals being targets of communication, from among the plurality of communication terminals” [(Para. 0049), the scheduled UE ki at time instant t is performed for each resource block… Note: scheduling UEs for transmission corresponds to selecting communication terminals that are targets of communication] “using the first radio wave quality information, and the communication requirement information” [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements, in which the scheduling decision is not only based on the instantaneous channel condition].
However, Bennis does not specifically disclose by using past information including at least second radio wave quality information on a past radio wave quality between the plurality of communication terminals and the plurality of antennas, and selecting one or more antennas to be used when communicating with the one or more communication terminals, from among the plurality of antennas, by using the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information
In an analogous art, Avidor teaches “by using past information including at least second radio wave quality information on a past radio wave quality between the plurality of communication terminals and the plurality of antennas,” as [(Para. 0060), Whenever a beam was used in the past to transmit a pilot signal, a report was transmitted by each MS back to the BS. The BS thus has collected past reports for any beam…. (Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports] “and selecting one or more antennas to be used when communicating with the one or more communication terminals, from among the plurality of antennas,” [(Para. 0060), For the selected MS, a preferred beam may be determined] “by using the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information” [(Para. 0061), Based on the collected reports, the ‘preferred beam’ may thus be the radiation pattern that has the highest average running data rate, or the highest corresponding average SIR… (Para. 0063), The scheduler at the BS then determines (function 460), based on the reports, which MS will receive a packet in the current timeslot… (Para. 0064), The BS then proceeds to transmit data (function 470) to the to the MS Jn selected by the scheduler in step 460 (which may, or may not be the MS selected in step 420) at the rate Rj n (n) (see equation (2) on the beam selected in step 430.].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis to provide an effective technique as taught by Avidor for schedules transmissions to users, when their time varying channels approach their top capacity, thus increasing the throughput of the system [Avidor: Para. 0005].
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Avidor teaches “wherein the past information further includes antenna information on one or more antennas selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired,” as [(Para. 0053), A method of determining a beam to be generated for a MS (and hence a scheduling method) in accordance with the exemplary embodiments or the present invention makes use of past MS reports.] “and the control method further comprises: referring to the past information to select a piece of the second radio wave quality information corresponding to the first radio wave quality information,” [(Para. 0060), Whenever a beam was used in the past to transmit a pilot signal, a report was transmitted by each MS back to the BS. The BS thus has collected past reports for any beam…. (Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports] “and selecting, by using a piece of the antenna information corresponding to the piece of the second radio wave quality information selected, the one or more antennas” [(Para. 0060), For the selected MS, a preferred beam may be determined].
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Avidor teaches “further comprising: storing, in the past information, at least the first radio wave quality information as the second radio wave quality information” as [(Para. 0067), In expression (3), j(m) is the index of the beam that was generated by the BS in timeslot n. For those m where j(m)=k, δ=1. For example, if k=3, for all m's where the third beam was generated, δ=1, else δ=0. Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports (or a chosen function of the reports), and pick the highest average. The denominator term δ(l,k) is provided to normalize the expression.].
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Avidor teaches “further comprising: acquiring the first radio wave quality information from a base station connected to the plurality of antennas” as [(Para. 0054), Accordingly, the BS may determine and generate the ‘preferred beam’ for a given MS based on the reports, or feedback, by the given MS to the BS].
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Avidor teaches “further comprising: transmitting, to the base station, control information including information on the one or more communication terminals and information on the one or more antennas” as [(Para. 0061), As discussed above, for each of the N beams, the BS may average information in the reports the MS transmits in response to transmissions on each of the beams (assuming a moderate number of beams)].
Regarding claim 43, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 25.
Regarding claim 44, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 25.
Claims 26-28, 30-31 and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennis in view of Avidor, and further in view of Faxen et al. (Pub. No. 2024/007944 A1 hereinafter Faxen).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Bennis teaches “further comprising: selecting one or more communication terminal candidates, from among the plurality of communication terminals, by using the communication requirement information,” as [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements, in which the scheduling decision is not only based on the instantaneous channel condition].
However, the combination of Bennis and Avidor does not specifically disclose estimating first communication performance to be obtained in a case of communicating with the one or more communication terminal candidates, and selecting, when the first communication performance meets a certain first communication performance condition, the one or more communication terminal candidates as the one or more communication terminals.
In an analogous art, Faxen teaches “estimating first communication performance to be obtained in a case of communicating with the one or more communication terminal candidates,” as [(Para. 0012), the method comprises estimating a first throughput for the WD at a first candidate secondary cell… (Para. 0017), the method further comprises estimating multiple throughputs for the WD at multiple candidate secondary cells] “and selecting, when the first communication performance meets a certain first communication performance condition, the one or more communication terminal candidates as the one or more communication terminals” [(Para. 0018), determine whether to select the first candidate secondary cell for the WD based at least in part on the first estimated throughput… (Para. 0022), select at least one of the multiple candidate secondary cells for the WD based on a comparison between the multiple estimated throughputs].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Faxen to estimate a throughput for the WD at a candidate secondary cell, the estimated throughput based at least in part on a measured inter-network node delay between the network node and another network node, the network node supporting (and/or hosting) a special cell and the another network node supporting (and/or hosting) the candidate secondary cell [Faxen Para. 0010].
Regarding claim 27, Bennis teaches “estimating, by using the piece of the second radio wave quality information selected, the first communication performance” as [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements, in which the scheduling decision is not only based on the instantaneous channel condition].
However, Bennis does not specifically disclose further comprising referring to the past information to select a piece of the second radio wave quality information corresponding to the first radio wave quality information.
In an analogous art, Avidor teaches “further comprising referring to the past information to select a piece of the second radio wave quality information corresponding to the first radio wave quality information” as [(Para. 0060), Whenever a beam was used in the past to transmit a pilot signal, a report was transmitted by each MS back to the BS. The BS thus has collected past reports for any beam…. (Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Faxen to estimate a throughput for the WD at a candidate secondary cell, the estimated throughput based at least in part on a measured inter-network node delay between the network node and another network node, the network node supporting (and/or hosting) a special cell and the another network node supporting (and/or hosting) the candidate secondary cell [Faxen Para. 0010].
Regarding claim 28, Bennis teaches “the control method further comprises estimating, by using a piece of the communication performance information corresponding to the piece of the second radio wave quality information selected, the first communication performance” as [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements, in which the scheduling decision is not only based on the instantaneous channel condition].
However, Bennis does not specifically disclose wherein the past information further includes communication performance information on communication performance measured or calculated at a time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired.
In an analogous art, Avidor teaches “wherein the past information further includes communication performance information on communication performance measured or calculated at a time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired” as [(Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports (or a chosen function of the reports), and pick the highest average. The denominator term δ(l,k) is provided to normalize the expression…].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Faxen to estimate a throughput for the WD at a candidate secondary cell, the estimated throughput based at least in part on a measured inter-network node delay between the network node and another network node, the network node supporting (and/or hosting) a special cell and the another network node supporting (and/or hosting) the candidate secondary cell [Faxen Para. 0010].
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen, specifically Avidor teaches “wherein the first communication performance includes at least one of a throughput, a communicable data amount, a frame coding rate, a modulation scheme, a frame error rate, a communication delay time, or a communication resource necessary for any one of the communication requirements to be met” as [(Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i.. . (Para. 0061), Based on the collected reports, the ‘preferred beam’ may thus be the radiation pattern that has the highest average running data rate… Note: Running average fed-back rates and average data rates correspond to the claimed throughput].
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen, specifically Bennis teaches “further comprising adjusting, in accordance with a utilization rate of communication resource, the number of the one or more communication terminals” as [(Para. 0044), the SCBS 120 schedules UEs 140 according to their QoS requirements by considering instantaneous channel conditions and completion time of each transmission… (Para. 0048), The proposed traffic-aware scheduling algorithm incorporates users' traffic requirements… Note: “QoS requirements “and “traffic requirements” correspond to the claimed “communication requirement information”].
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Avidor teaches “further comprising: selecting one or more antenna candidates, from among the plurality of antennas, by using the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information,” [(Para. 0060), For the selected MS, a preferred beam may be determined].
However, the combination of Bennis and Avidor does not specifically disclose estimating second communication performance to be obtained in a case of using the one or more antenna candidates for communication with the one or more communication terminals, and selecting, when the second communication performance meets a certain second communication performance condition, the one or more antenna candidates as the one or more antennas.
In an analogous art, Faxen teaches “estimating second communication performance to be obtained in a case of using the one or more antenna candidates for communication with the one or more communication terminals,” as [(Para. 0012), the method comprises estimating a first throughput for the WD at a first candidate secondary cell… (Para. 0017), the method further comprises estimating multiple throughputs for the WD at multiple candidate secondary cells] “and selecting, when the second communication performance meets a certain second communication performance condition, the one or more antenna candidates as the one or more antennas” [(Para. 0018), determine whether to select the first candidate secondary cell for the WD based at least in part on the first estimated throughput… (Para. 0022), select at least one of the multiple candidate secondary cells for the WD based on a comparison between the multiple estimated throughputs].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Faxen to estimate a throughput for the WD at a candidate secondary cell, the estimated throughput based at least in part on a measured inter-network node delay between the network node and another network node, the network node supporting (and/or hosting) a special cell and the another network node supporting (and/or hosting) the candidate secondary cell [Faxen Para. 0010].
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen, specifically Avidor teaches “wherein the second communication performance includes at least one of a throughput, a communicable data amount, a frame coding rate, a modulation scheme, a frame error rate, a communication delay time, or a communication resource necessary for any one of the communication requirements to be met” [(Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i.. . (Para. 0061), Based on the collected reports, the ‘preferred beam’ may thus be the radiation pattern that has the highest average running data rate… Note: Running average fed-back rates and average data rates correspond to the claimed throughput]..
Claims 29 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennis in view of Avidor, and further in view of Faxen, and further in view of Tullberg et al. (Pub. No. 2022/0322195 A1 hereinafter Tullberg).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen does not specifically disclose wherein the past information further includes terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at a time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired and communication performance information on communication performance measured or calculated at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired, the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information and the one or more communication terminal candidates to estimate the first communication performance, and the model is a model created by learning the past information.
In an analogous art, Tullberg teaches “wherein the past information further includes terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at a time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired and communication performance information on communication performance measured or calculated at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired,” as [(Para. 0016), The processing circuitry may be further operable to determine the UE handover to the target cell failed and update the first sequential time-based machine learning model based on the failure information. The processing circuitry may be further operable to train a second sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a second cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the second cluster of cells, and cell identifiers of the target cells of the second cluster of cells for each handover. The processing circuitry may be operable to predict the time for a UE handover to a target cell by using the second sequential time- based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE, and geographic positions associated with the radio link monitoring measurements.] “the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information and the one or more communication terminal candidates to estimate the first communication performance,” [(Para. 0009), The method further comprises: predicting a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE,] “and the model is a model created by learning the past information” [(Para. 0015), The network node comprises processing circuitry operable to train a first sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a first cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the first cluster of cells; and cell identifiers of the target cells of the first cluster of cells for each handover].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis, Avidor and Faxen to provide an effective technique as taught by Tullberg to avoid handover is extremely important in future networks. Ultra-dense networks may introduce interference between cells. A user equipment (UE) will need to continuously monitor the signal quality from its serving base station, as well as base stations from other cells. This is extremely costly in terms of overhead. Overhead can cause delay which can lead to handover failures. Handover failures can significantly decrease the overall performance of the system. [Tullberg: Para. 0006].
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen, specifically Avidor teaches “wherein the past information further includes the communication performance information on the communication performance measured or calculated at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired,” as [(Para. 0067), Expression (3) says: the preferred beam of MS i at timeslot n is the beam having the highest running average fed-back rates of mobile i. In other words, evaluate each of the N beams one by one, looking for all past occurrences of the beam, and average past reports…. (Para. 0054), The ‘preferred beam’ may be understood as the radiation pattern that has the highest average running data rate, or the corresponding SIR] “the terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired, and antenna information on the one or more antennas selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired” [(Para. 0063), The scheduler at the BS then determines (function 460), based on the reports, which MS will receive a packet in the current timeslot… (Para. 0064), The BS then proceeds to transmit data (function 470) to the to the MS Jn selected by the scheduler in step 460].
However, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Faxen does not specifically disclose the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information, the one or more communication terminals, and the one or more antenna candidates to estimate the second communication performance, and the model is a model created by learning the past information.
In an analogous art, Tullberg teaches “the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information, the one or more communication terminals, and the one or more antenna candidates to estimate the second communication performance,” as [(Para. 0009), The method further comprises: predicting a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE,] “and the model is a model created by learning the past information” [(Para. 0015), The network node comprises processing circuitry operable to train a first sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a first cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the first cluster of cells; and cell identifiers of the target cells of the first cluster of cells for each handover].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis, Avidor and Faxen to provide an effective technique as taught by Tullberg to avoid handover is extremely important in future networks. Ultra-dense networks may introduce interference between cells. A user equipment (UE) will need to continuously monitor the signal quality from its serving base station, as well as base stations from other cells. This is extremely costly in terms of overhead. Overhead can cause delay which can lead to handover failures. Handover failures can significantly decrease the overall performance of the system. [Tullberg: Para. 0006].
Claims 32, 33, 37 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennis in view of Avidor, and further in view of Tullberg et al. (Pub. No. 2022/0322195 A1 hereinafter Tullberg).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Bennis and Avidor, specifically Bennis teaches “wherein the past information further includes terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at a time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired,” as (Para. 0049), the scheduled UE ki at time instant t is performed for each resource block…].
However, the combination of Bennis and Avidor does not specifically disclose the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information and the communication requirement information to select the one or more communication terminals, and the model is a model created by learning the past information and the communication requirement information.
In an analogous art, Tullberg teaches “the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the first radio wave quality information and the communication requirement information to select the one or more communication terminals,” (Para. 0015), The network node comprises processing circuitry operable to train a first sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE… (), The processing circuitry is further operable to: predict a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE] “and the model is a model created by learning the past information and the communication requirement information” [(Para. 0015), The network node comprises processing circuitry operable to train a first sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a first cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the first cluster of cells; and cell identifiers of the target cells of the first cluster of cells for each handover].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Tullberg to avoid handover is extremely important in future networks. Ultra-dense networks may introduce interference between cells. A user equipment (UE) will need to continuously monitor the signal quality from its serving base station, as well as base stations from other cells. This is extremely costly in terms of overhead. Overhead can cause delay which can lead to handover failures. Handover failures can significantly decrease the overall performance of the system. [Tullberg: Para. 0006].
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Tullberg, specifically Tullberg teaches “further comprising: determining an area where learning is being performed in the model and adjusting, based on the area, the parameters input into the model” as [(Para. 0015), The processing circuitry is further operable to: predict a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE…].
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Bennis and Avidor does not specifically disclose wherein the past information further includes the terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired and antenna information on the one or more antennas selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired, the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information to select the one or more antennas, and the model is a model created by learning the past information.
In an analogous art, Tullberg teaches “wherein the past information further includes the terminal information on the one or more communication terminals selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired and antenna information on the one or more antennas selected at the time point when the second radio wave quality information is acquired,” as [(Para. 0016), The processing circuitry may be further operable to determine the UE handover to the target cell failed and update the first sequential time-based machine learning model based on the failure information. The processing circuitry may be further operable to train a second sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a second cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the second cluster of cells, and cell identifiers of the target cells of the second cluster of cells for each handover. The processing circuitry may be operable to predict the time for a UE handover to a target cell by using the second sequential time- based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE, and geographic positions associated with the radio link monitoring measurements.] “the control method further comprises inputting, into a model created in advance, parameters including the one or more communication terminals and the first radio wave quality information to select the one or more antennas” [(Para.0009), The method further comprises: predicting a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE,] “and the model is a model created by learning the past information” [(Para. 0015), The network node comprises processing circuitry operable to train a first sequential time-based machine learning model using radio link monitoring measurements for a UE from a plurality of geographic positions within a first cluster of cells, times of handover of the UE to target cells of the first cluster of cells; and cell identifiers of the target cells of the first cluster of cells for each handover].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings as in Bennis and Avidor to provide an effective technique as taught by Tullberg to avoid handover is extremely important in future networks. Ultra-dense networks may introduce interference between cells. A user equipment (UE) will need to continuously monitor the signal quality from its serving base station, as well as base stations from other cells. This is extremely costly in terms of overhead. Overhead can cause delay which can lead to handover failures. Handover failures can significantly decrease the overall performance of the system. [Tullberg: Para. 0006].
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Bennis, Avidor and Tullberg , specifically Tullberg teaches “further comprising: determining a learned area in the model and adjusting, based on the learned area, the parameters input into the model” as [(Para. 0015), he processing circuitry is further operable to: predict a time for a UE handover to a target cell using the first sequential time-based machine learning model, radio link monitoring measurements for the UE, and geographic positions associated with the radio link monitoring measurements; determine whether enough time exists to perform the UE handover before the predicted handover time; and upon determining enough time exists to perform the UE handover before the predicted handover time, perform the UE handover to the target cell.].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATALI N PASCUAL PEGUERO whose telephone number is (571)272-4691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11AM-9PM.
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, ASAD M NAWAZ can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/NATALI PASCUAL PEGUERO/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights