Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the application filed on 19 July 2024.
Claims 1-15 are presently pending for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/19/2024 has being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 15 recites computer readable storage medium which appear to cover both transitory and non-transitory embodiments. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is required to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (during patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2.
The Examiner suggests that the Applicant add the limitation “non-transitory” to the computer readable storage medium as recited in the claim(s) in order to properly render the claim(s) in statutory form in view of their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the originally filed specification. The Examiner also suggests that the specification may be amended to include the term “non-transitory computer readable storage medium” to avoid a potential objection to the specification for a lack of antecedent basis of the claimed terminology.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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) 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prasad et al., U. S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0404460 in view of Kish, U. S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0180396.
Regarding claim 1, Prasad discloses the method comprising the steps of: obtaining a data consumption pattern related to of a node device over a time period (see Prasad, ¶ [0006]; data consumption pattern is determined for a period of time); obtaining data consumption patterns of the plurality of backhaul units over the same time period (see Prasad, ¶ [0031-[0032] and [0065]; consumption pattern relating to backhaul node is obtained); matching the data consumption pattern of the node device to one of the data consumption patterns of the plurality of backhaul units (see Prasad, ¶ [0060] and [0073]; analysis and comparison of the consumption pattern is made); and identifying association of the node device to a backhaul unit having the matched data consumption pattern (see Prasad, ¶ [0073], [0079] and [0082]; Determination is made based on the data consumption pattern result).
Although Prasad discloses the invention substantially as claimed, it does not explicitly disclose a method of identifying association of a backhaul unit to a node device which is already connected to the backhaul unit in a network, the network comprising a plurality of backhaul units each arranged for connecting to a node device and for providing network connection to the node device.
Kish teaches a method of identifying association of a backhaul unit to a node device which is already connected to the backhaul unit in a network, the network comprising a plurality of backhaul units each arranged for connecting to a node device and for providing network connection to the node device (see Kish, ¶ [0010]-[0011] and [0021]). It would have been obvious to on of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Kish with that of Prasad in order to efficiently identify backhaul associations based on the data consumption patterns.
Regarding claim 2, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the data consumption pattern of the node device is negotiated by a remote application with the node device, the method comprising, subsequent to the step of obtaining a data consumption pattern related to of a node device over a time period, a further step of: aligning with the node device about the time period of the data consumption pattern (see Prasad, ¶ [0004] and [0023]).
Regarding claim 3, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the data consumption pattern of the node device is obtained from the node device, the step of obtaining data consumption patterns of the plurality of backhaul units over the same time period comprises retrieving stored data consumption patterns of the plurality of backhaul units over the same time period (see Prasad, ¶ [0031] and [0065]).
Regarding claim 4, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the data consumption pattern of a node device comprises a number of data consumptions in consecutive time frames of the same number (see Prasad, ¶ [0024] and [0059]).
Regarding claim 5, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the data consumption pattern related to of a node device further comprises at least one of a volume of each data consumption, a direction of each data consumption and presence/absence of each data consumption (see Prasad, ¶ [0007] and [0060]).
Regarding claim 6, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein each non-zero data consumption is at least one kilobytes in each time frame (see Prasad, ¶ [0023] and [0059]).
Regarding claim 7, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein a backhaul unit is configured to support a plurality of communication ports, the step of obtaining data consumption patterns of the plurality of backhaul units over the same time period comprises obtaining data consumption of each communication ports of the plurality of backhaul unit over the same time period; the step of matching comprises matching the data consumption pattern of the node device to one of the data consumption patterns of communication ports of the plurality of backhaul units; and the step of identifying association comprises identifying association of the node device to a communication port of a backhaul unit having the matched data consumption pattern (see Prasad, ¶ [0031] and [0060]).
Regarding claim 8, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the step of matching comprises the steps of: calculating an indicator of relevance of the data consumption pattern of the node device with each data consumption pattern of the backhaul units; and matching the data consumption pattern of the node device to a data consumption pattern of the backhaul unit with an indicator indicating a highest relevance (see Prasad, ¶ [0008] and [0064]).
Regarding claim 9, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the indicator of relevance is based on a covariance or a Pearson coefficient between the data consumption pattern related to the node device and each data consumption pattern of the backhaul units (see Prasad, ¶ [0041] and [0064]).
Regarding claim 10, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein the indicator of relevance is further based on absolute values of the data consumption pattern of the node device and of data consumption patterns of the backhaul units (see Prasad, ¶ [0064] and [0090]).
Regarding claim 11, Prasad-Kish teaches further comprising the step of blocking the node device from creating data consumption above a defined threshold during the time period (see Prasad, ¶ [0062] and [0093]).
Regarding claim 12, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein each node device is identified by a unique node identification, each backhaul unit is identified by a unique backhaul identification, the step of identifying association comprises identifying association of a unique node identification of the node device with a unique backhaul identification of a backhaul unit having the matched data consumption pattern (see Prasad, ¶ [0062]).
Regarding claim 13, Prasad-Kish teaches wherein each backhaul unit is installed on a light pole and supports one or more Power over Ethernet, PoE, port, and a node device comprises at least one of a lighting controller, a camera and a sensor (see Prasad, ¶ [0064]).
Claim 14 list all the same elements of claim 1, but in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 14.
Claim 15 list all the same elements of claim 1, but in computer program product form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 15.
Prior Art of Record
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Please refer to form PTO-892 (Notice of Reference Cited) for a list of relevant prior art.
a. US 20180063848 A1 is directed to a system for providing small cell backhaul communication includes a small cell backhaul network including a plurality of small cell network nodes. A software defined network (SDN) controller controls link configuration between the plurality of small cell network nodes of the small cell backhaul network. The SDN controller communicates control channel information with the plurality of small cell network backhaul nodes over a control channel using a communications protocol that enables software defined networking.
b. US 20140064083 A1 is directed to a network device may make a determination that a first backhaul connection, which serves a first base station, is congested and that a second backhaul connection, which serves a second base station, is not congested. This determination may be made based on a first periodic data cap imposed (on the first backhaul connection, a traffic load on the first backhaul connection, a second periodic data cap imposed on the second backhaul connection, and a traffic load on the second backhaul connection. In response to the determination, the network device may configure a value of a cellular communication parameter utilized by one or both of the base stations. The configuration may comprise periodic adjustments of the value of the cellular communication parameter. The periodic adjustments may cause one or more mobile devices to be cyclically handed-over between the first base station and the second base station.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED IBRAHIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1132. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:30AM to 6:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John Follansbee can be reached on 571-272-3964. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Mohamed Ibrahim/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444