DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to 6/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/11/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 10, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kovacs et al. US 20230198640 A1, hereinafter Kovacs.
Regarding Claim 10, Kovacs discloses a method, comprising:
receiving, from a plurality of cells in a cellular network, signal-quality data that corresponds to a channel-quality-indicator value (Kovacs at least [0048] discloses a model based on training data (e.g., including CQI values reported by a UE and a plurality of corresponding measured RSRP values reported by the UE), and then used to determine a plurality of estimated RSRP values ; [0071] discloses the ML training block and the ML model may be provided at an external node or device); and
utilizing the received signal-quality data to instruct at least one of the plurality of cells to handle communications for a user device for the channel-quality-indicator value (Kovacs at least [0022] discloses mobility/handover of user devices between BSs; [0028] discloses RSRP reports used to adjust or assist with network operation, and/or or improve various aspects of network operation, based on varying or changing channel conditions; [0029] discloses AI/ML techniques).
Regarding Claim 12, Kovacs discloses the method of claim 10 and further discloses further comprising: generating a quality report for each cell of the plurality of cells based on the received signal-quality data (Kovacs at least Fig. 2 and [0052] discloses that the ML model RSRP estimation block 214 may determine a plurality of estimated RSRP values that are estimated based at least on CQI values reported by the UE).
Regarding Claim 13, Kovacs discloses the method of claim 10 and further discloses wherein utilizing the received signal-quality data to instruct at least one of the plurality of cells to handle communications for the user device for the channel-quality-indicator value comprises: handing over communications for the user device from a first cell to a second cell based on the received signal-quality data for the channel-quality-indicator value (Kovacs at least [0022] discloses mobility/handover of user devices between BSs; [0028] discloses RSRP reports used to adjust or assist with network operation, and/or or improve various aspects of network operation, based on varying or changing channel conditions; [0029] discloses AI/ML techniques).
Regarding Claim 15, Kovacs discloses the method of claim 10 and further discloses further comprising: determining an estimated signal quality for the channel-quality-indicator value for a target cell of the plurality of cells based on the received signal-quality data for the target cell for the channel-quality-indicator value (Kovacs at least Fig. 2 and [0052] discloses that the ML model RSRP estimation block 214 may determine a plurality of estimated RSRP values that are estimated based at least on CQI values reported by the UE).
Claims 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoon et al. US 20200007282 A1, hereinafter Yoon.
Regarding Claim 16, Yoon discloses a computing system for a cell (Yoon see Fig. 18) in a cellular network, comprising:
a memory configured to store computer instructions (Yoon see Fig. 18); and
a processor (Yoon see Fig. 18) configured to execute the computer instructions to:
select one or more user devices in communication with the cell for a selected channel-quality-indicator value (Yoon at least [0187-0188] discloses measured UL CQI transmitted to a BS or a network entity for supporting UE mobility; the BS or network entity performs selection based on the received UL CQI; [0222-0227] discloses that a BS may perform BS selection based on the UL channel quality measurement);
obtain signal-quality data for the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value (Yoon at least [0179] disclosing UL CQI and DL CQI including at least RSRP and RSRQ values); and
utilize the signal-quality data for the selected channel-quality-indicator value to manage handover requests related to the cell (Yoon [0176-0177] discloses the BS (cell) selection method to support UE mobility; a BS may be selected by considering DL and UL channel quality information received by a BS or a network entity; also see [0226-0227]).
Regarding Claim 18, Yoon discloses the system of claim 16 and further discloses wherein the processor selects the one or more user devices by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to:
obtain a channel-quality-indicator value from a plurality of user devices in communication with the cell (Yoon at least [0017] discloses when there are a plurality of UEs, uplink signals for the uplink channel quality measurement at the plurality of UEs may be multiplexed); and
select the one or more user devices from the plurality of user devices that provided the selected channel-quality-indicator value (Yoon at least [0187-0188] discloses measured UL CQI transmitted to a BS or a network entity for supporting UE mobility; the BS or network entity performs selection based on the received UL CQI; [0222-0227] discloses that a BS may perform BS selection based on the UL channel quality measurement).
Regarding Claim 19, Yoon discloses the system of claim 16 and further discloses wherein the processor obtains the signal-quality data from the selected one or more user devices by being configured to further execute the computer instructions to:
obtain a reference-signal-received-power value and a reference-signal-received-quality value for each of the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value (Yoon at least [0179] disclosing UL CQI and DL CQI including at least RSRP and RSRQ values).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kovacs, as applied to claims above, and further in view of Lin et al. US 20240056933 A1, hereinafter Lin.
Regarding Claim 11, Kovacs discloses the method of claim 10 and further discloses wherein receiving the signal-quality data that corresponds to the selected channel-quality-indicator value comprises: receiving, from the plurality of cells, reference-signal-received-power values (Kovacs at least [0048] discloses a model based on training data (e.g., including CQI values reported by a UE and a plurality of corresponding measured RSRP values reported by the UE), and then used to determine a plurality of estimated RSRP values).
Kovacs fails to explicitly disclose receiving reference-signal-received-quality values.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lin more specifically discloses wherein receiving the signal-quality data that corresponds to the selected channel-quality-indicator value comprises: receiving, from the plurality of cells, (Lin at least [0067, 0074-0078] discloses building a mobility management model using RSRP and RSRQ reported by UEs; see Fig. 6 and [0085]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the signal quality data of Kovacs with the teachings of Lin to improve the robustness of handovers for user equipments.
Regarding Claim 14, Kovacs discloses the method of claim 10 and further discloses further comprising: determining an estimated reference-signal-received-power value (Kovacs at least Fig. 2 and [0052] discloses that the ML model RSRP estimation block 214 may determine a plurality of estimated RSRP values that are estimated based at least on CQI values reported by the UE).
Kovacs fails to explicitly disclose determining an estimated reference-signal-received-quality value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Lin more specifically discloses further comprising: determining an (Lin at least [0067, 0074-0078] discloses building a mobility management model using RSRP and RSRQ reported by UEs; see Fig. 6 and [0085]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the signal quality data of Kovacs with the teachings of Lin to improve the robustness of handovers for user equipments.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, 12, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12041507. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
For instant application claims 1-9, issued patent claims a system, comprising: a plurality of cells in a network, each corresponding cell of the plurality of cells includes: a first memory that stores first computer instructions; and a first processor that executes the first computer instructions to perform first actions, the first actions including: receiving a request to obtain quality data from user devices having a selected channel-quality-indicator value in communication with the corresponding cell; obtaining a channel-quality-indicator value for each user device in communication with the corresponding cell; selecting, based on the obtained channel-quality-indicator values, one or more user devices in communication with the corresponding cell that have the selected channel-quality-indicator value; sending a request to each corresponding user device of the selected one or more user devices for a reference-signal-received-power value and a reference-signal-received-quality value for the corresponding user device for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; and obtaining the reference-signal-received-power value and the reference-signal-received-quality value for each of the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; and a cell quality server that includes: a second memory that stores second computer instructions; and a second processor that executes the second computer instructions to perform second actions, the second actions including: sending the request to each of the plurality of cells to obtain the quality data for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; receiving, from the plurality of cells, the quality data including the reference-signal-received-power values, and the reference-signal-received-quality values for each of the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; generating a quality report for each cell of the plurality of cells based on the quality data: receiving a request to handover communications for a target user device from a first cell to a second cell of the plurality of cells; and handing over communications for the target user device from the first cell to the second cell based on an estimated reference-signal-received-power value and an estimated reference-signal-received-quality value for the selected channel-quality-indicator value for the second cell for the target user device generated from the reference-signal-received-power values and the reference-signal-received-quality values in the quality report for the second cell (see claim 1).
For instant application claims 10-12, the issued patent claims a method, comprising: receiving, from a plurality of cells in a cellular network, quality data for each user device of one or more user devices in communication with each corresponding cell of the plurality of cells, wherein the quality data of a user device indicates a reference-signal-received-power value and a reference-signal-received-quality value and a corresponding channel-quality-indicator value; generating a quality report for each corresponding cell of the plurality of cells for each of a plurality of channel-quality-indicator values based on the received reference-signal-received-power values and the received reference-signal-received-quality values; and utilizing the generated quality reports to determine which of the plurality of cells is to handle communications for a target user device for a target channel-quality-indicator value (see claim 8).
For instant application claim 13, the issued patent claims the method of claim 8, wherein utilizing the generated quality report to determine which of the plurality of cells is to handle communications for the target user device further comprises: receiving a request to handover communications for the target user device from a first cell to a second cell of the plurality of cells; identifying one or more potential cells from the plurality of cells; and selecting the second cell from the one or more potential cells based on the generated quality reports (see claim 12).
For instant application claims 14-15, the issued patent claims the method of claim 8, wherein utilizing the generated quality report to determine which of the plurality of cells is to handle communications for the target user device further comprises: determining an estimated reference-signal-received-power value and estimated reference-signal-received-quality value for the target channel-quality-indicator value for each corresponding cell of the plurality of cells based on the reference-signal-received-power values and the reference-signal-received-quality values received from the corresponding cell for the target channel-quality-indicator value; and selecting a target cell to handle communications for the target user device in response to the estimated reference-signal-received-power value and estimated reference-signal-received-quality value for the target cell exceeding threshold values (see claim 14).
For instant application claims 16-20, the issued patent claims a system, comprising: a plurality of cells in a network, each corresponding cell of the plurality of cells includes: a first memory that stores first computer instructions; and a first processor that executes the first computer instructions to perform first actions, the first actions including: receiving a request to obtain quality data from user devices having a selected channel-quality-indicator value in communication with the corresponding cell; obtaining a channel-quality-indicator value for each user device in communication with the corresponding cell; selecting, based on the obtained channel-quality-indicator values, one or more user devices in communication with the corresponding cell that have the selected channel-quality-indicator value; sending a request to each corresponding user device of the selected one or more user devices for a reference-signal-received-power value and a reference-signal-received-quality value for the corresponding user device for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; and obtaining the reference-signal-received-power value and the reference-signal-received-quality value for each of the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; and a cell quality server that includes: a second memory that stores second computer instructions; and a second processor that executes the second computer instructions to perform second actions, the second actions including: sending the request to each of the plurality of cells to obtain the quality data for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; receiving, from the plurality of cells, the quality data including the reference-signal-received-power values, and the reference-signal-received-quality values for each of the selected one or more user devices for the selected channel-quality-indicator value; generating a quality report for each cell of the plurality of cells based on the quality data: receiving a request to handover communications for a target user device from a first cell to a second cell of the plurality of cells; and handing over communications for the target user device from the first cell to the second cell based on an estimated reference-signal-received-power value and an estimated reference-signal-received-quality value for the selected channel-quality-indicator value for the second cell for the target user device generated from the reference-signal-received-power values and the reference-signal-received-quality values in the quality report for the second cell (see claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cendrillon US 20190150005 A1
Wei et al. US 20230388941 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWON KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, GARY MUI can be reached at (571)270-1420. 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.
/Y.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/GARY MUI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights